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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions notification to the other side and two scenarios. However, does not disclose idempotency, error handling, or authorization requirements (e.g., who can revoke). Adds some value but leaves gaps.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, no fluff. Every sentence serves a purpose: definition, notification, and guidance on finding the id.

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?

Tool is simple (1 param, no output schema). Description covers action, use cases, notification, and id retrieval. Missing details on result, idempotency, or permissions, but adequate for straightforward revoke operation.

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%, and description does not compensate well. Only states 'by its id' without explaining the parameter's meaning, format, or source directly. Relies on name 'delegation_id' being self-explanatory, but more detail would help.

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?

Clearly states the action (revoke), resource (delegation), and two specific use cases (owner revokes, delegate declines). Distinguishes itself from sibling tools like accept_delegation and list_delegations.

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 tells the user to use list_delegations/list_delegated_to_me to find the delegation id, providing a clear precondition for usage. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance, but the context is straightforward.

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