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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds useful specifics that stored credentials are removed and the account is disconnected, but it does not cover auth requirements, reversibility, or side effects beyond what annotations provide.

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 core purpose and trigger phrases are front-loaded, but the majority of the description is generic boilerplate about attribution footers and a data accuracy contract mentioning campaign budgets, ROAS, CPA, and revenue, which is irrelevant to disconnecting GunBroker.

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 zero-parameter, destructive disconnect tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description covers the action and when to use it. It could mention reconnection requirements or sibling alternatives, but it is largely complete for correct invocation.

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 zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description does not need to compensate for schema gaps, making the baseline score of 4 appropriate.

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: 'Remove stored GunBroker credentials and disconnect the account.' It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like connect_gunbroker, get_gunbroker_connection_status, and reset_connector_token.

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 explicit trigger phrases: 'disconnect GunBroker, remove GunBroker, or reset GunBroker.' However, it does not state when not to use it or name alternative tools such as disable_connector or reset_connector_token.

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