delete_auth_connection

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, covering the key behavioral traits. The description adds no additional context about what gets destroyed, whether the action is reversible, or any rate limits or auth requirements, so it does not enhance the behavioral picture beyond the 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?

The description is a single, efficient phrase that is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words. It is concise but under-specified for a deletion operation.

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 destructive operation with no output schema and an undocumented parameter, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the consequences of deletion, required permissions, or how to obtain the auth_connection_id, leaving significant gaps for safe tool invocation.

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 'auth_connection_id' has 0% schema description coverage, meaning neither the schema nor the description explains what this ID represents or its format. The description provides no information about the parameter, leaving it completely undocumented.

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?

States a clear verb (Delete) and resource (Workspace Auth Connection), which is specific enough. However, it provides no differentiation from sibling tools like delete_secret_route or delete_workspace_webhook_route, which are also workspace-level deletion operations.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like deleting a secret or webhook, nor does it mention any prerequisites such as required permissions or the impact of deletion.

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