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

Description discloses that the credential is revoked and syncs stop, but imported products persist—adds behavioral nuance beyond annotations. Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description clarifies what exactly is destroyed (credential, not products). IdempotentHint=true is not mentioned but implied by the safe-to-retry nature; no contradiction.

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?

One tight sentence plus a status note. Front-loaded with the core action. Could be more structured (e.g., separate sections), but no fluff.

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?

Covers main effect and what remains, but lacks output schema (none exists) and does not address idempotency or the role of required parameters. For a destructive operation with 5 params, more detail on usage context and response behavior would improve completeness.

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 40% schema coverage, the description should compensate but does not describe any parameters. It mentions the store ID in the path, but does not explain required params like idempotency_key or brand_id. The query and workspace_id parameters are left unexplained. Significant gap.

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 specifies the action: DELETE to revoke credential and stop syncs, with a note that imported products remain. It distinguishes from sibling tools like connect_ecommerce_store and sync_ecommerce_store by naming the specific effect.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., store must be connected) or contexts where disconnection is appropriate. Sibling tools exist (connect, sync) but no differentiation cues.

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