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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, but the description goes well beyond that by enumerating the cascade: saved queries keep SQL but lose the connection, dependent charts/dashboards/alerts break, and watching triggers are deleted. The closing clarification 'the database itself is not touched' is exactly the kind of scope boundary an agent needs before confirming a destructive call.

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?

Front-loaded with verb, resource and audience, then the impact. The second sentence is a long run-on chaining three separate consequences, which slightly hurts scannability, but no clause is filler.

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?

For a single-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the definition covers permission gating, downstream effects, trigger deletion, and the explicit non-effect on the database. Nothing needed to call it safely is missing.

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?

Only one parameter and schema coverage is 100%, with the schema itself explaining where the id comes from (fastero_list_connections, fastero_create_file_connection). The description adds nothing about connectionId, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a data connection') plus the blast radius ('for the whole organization'), which no sibling delete tool shares. An agent can immediately tell this apart from fastero_delete_query, fastero_delete_dashboard, or fastero_delete_file.

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?

Gives the permission precondition ('its owners, admins and editors can') and the consequences that inform a use/skip decision ('charts, dashboards and alerts ... stop until each query is moved'). It never names an explicit alternative or a 'do not use when' clause, so it falls short of a 5.

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