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

Annotations provide several crucial behavioral hints (idempotent, not destructive), which mitigates the need for the description to explain core behavioral safety. The description itself is minimally behavioral, simply stating the intent.

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 description is one concise sentence that perfectly summarizes the tool's function, adding no superfluous detail.

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 tool requires context beyond just 'disabling' to ensure the agent selects the correct method. Since it lacks sibling differentiation, zero usage guidance, and is a destructive-adjacent action (even if non-destructive per annotations), it is incomplete.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage and only one parameter, the description doesn't need to add significant value beyond naming the parameter. It relies on the schema to specify that 'connector_id' is the UUID of the connector.

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 states the basic action ('Disable a connector'), but is too general. It doesn't distinguish how it interacts with the connector resource specifically (e.g., logically disabling it, turning off services) compared to other connector management 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 provides zero guidance on when or how to use this tool. There is no mention of the context where disconnection is necessary, or if any alternative tools exist.

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