Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Beyond annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true), the description discloses that the action is destructive and irreversible, leads to immediate 401 for integrations, and specifies response codes (404 for unknown ids, 204 No Content on success). No contradiction with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise, consisting of two sentences in the first paragraph for purpose and usage, and a second paragraph for behavioral details. It is front-loaded with the essential action and usage, with no extraneous content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, annotations present), the description covers purpose, usage, behavioral details, parameter semantics, and error codes comprehensively. It is complete for understanding and invoking the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema covers the 'id' parameter with a basic description. The description adds value by explaining that the id comes from v1ListUserTokens, guiding the user on how to obtain it. This surpasses the schema-only baseline of 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description directly tells when to use the tool ('Use this when the user wants to invalidate a token') and how to prepare ('use listUserTokens to find the id'), providing clear guidance on usage and alternative.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.