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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds that consent is revoked, connection data is deleted, and data becomes unavailable. It also notes the return of a re-connect URL, providing non-obvious behavioral detail beyond 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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the main action, followed by consequence and return value. No redundant or extraneous information.

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?

The description covers the return value without an output schema, which is helpful. However, it omits details about the input parameter and potential errors. Given the low complexity and zero schema coverage, the description is adequate but not fully complete.

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 coverage is 0% and the description does not clarify the 'item' parameter. It says 'for a specific bank' but does not specify what value to provide (bank ID, connection ID, etc.). The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema.

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. It specifies the resource (specific bank) and the consequence (data no longer available). The return of an add_connection_url distinguishes this from other openfinance tools.

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?

The description implies use for disconnecting a bank but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives or provide context on prerequisites. No mention of when not to use.

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