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

Annotations already set destructiveHint=true, so the description adds value by explaining that data will no longer be available and that a re-connection URL is returned. This goes beyond the annotation, providing useful behavioral context.

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 concise sentences. The first sentence states the primary action, the second adds the return value. No unnecessary words, and key information is front-loaded.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the main action and result. However, it lacks explanation of the parameter and does not mention any preconditions or side effects beyond what is annotated, leaving some gaps.

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 single parameter 'item' has no description in the schema and the description does not explain what it represents. Although 'specific bank' is mentioned, the parameter is not explicitly defined, leaving ambiguity.

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 (revokes consent and deletes connection data) and the result (data no longer available). It also mentions a return value, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_connections or get_item_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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like openfinance_list_connections. The description implies it is for disconnecting a bank, but does not explicitly state when it is appropriate or what prerequisites exist.

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