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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety and repeat-call profile is covered by structured data. The description adds the valuable auth context ('Requires live user API'), but says nothing about irreversibility, effect on the active session, or error behavior beyond that.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence: verb, resource, identity constraint, endpoint, and prerequisite, with no filler. Every clause earns its place.

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 one-parameter mutation with annotations present and no output schema, the description is adequate but stops short. It omits outcome/error semantics and any note about whether revoking the active credential terminates the session, which an agent needs before calling a destructive endpoint.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden and does explain the lone parameter's meaning and format ('16-hex id'). That is more than the bare pattern in the schema, though it does not state the source of the id (e.g. from list_credentials).

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 ('Revoke one credential') plus the identity format and the underlying endpoint. An agent can immediately distinguish this from sibling memeswap_create_credential and memeswap_list_credentials without opening the schema.

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?

'Requires live user API' is a prerequisite, not usage guidance. It does not say when to revoke versus rotate or recreate a credential, nor what happens if the id is unknown; usage is only implied by the verb.

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