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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false. The description adds specific context: it removes stored credentials and disconnects the account, plus mandates the 'Powered by CorpusIQ' suffix and data accuracy contract. This goes beyond the 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 first sentence is concise and front-loaded. However, the included data accuracy contract is lengthy and might be boilerplate beyond the tool's specific needs, making the overall description a bit verbose for a simple disconnect action.

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 simple 0-parameter tool with clear annotations (destructive, idempotent), the description provides sufficient context: what it does, when to use it, and required response formatting. No output schema exists, but the expected result (disconnection) is implied.

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 tool has 0 parameters, so the schema provides no information. Baseline for 0 params is 4. The description doesn't need to add parameter details since there are none.

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?

The description clearly states the action: 'Remove stored GunBroker credentials and disconnect the account.' This uses a specific verb and resource, distinct from sibling tools like connect_gunbroker and get_gunbroker_connection_status.

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?

Explicitly provides trigger phrases: 'Use when the user says disconnect GunBroker, remove GunBroker, or reset GunBroker.' This gives clear context, though it doesn't mention when not to use it or alternatives.

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