revoke_broker_connection

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

The description confirms the destructive nature (removing tokens) which aligns with annotations (destructiveHint=true). However, it does not disclose potential side effects like active trading disruption or whether tokens are permanently lost. The description adds moderate value 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. Every word adds value, clearly stating the action and its effect.

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?

Given no output schema, the description should hint at return values or confirmation messages. It lacks this, as well as error conditions or permission requirements. The context from annotations and sibling tools helps but leaves 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?

Schema has 0% parameter description coverage, yet the tool description does not explain what 'broker' or 'user_id' specifically refer to (e.g., broker identifier format or user context). This forces reliance on parameter names alone.

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 verb 'disconnect' and the resource 'broker OAuth connection', and adds the effect 'remove stored tokens'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like connect_broker, validate_broker_connection, and get_connected_brokers by specifying the reverse action.

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 usage for disconnecting a broker but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, such as when needing to validate a connection or list connections. No prerequisites or exclusion criteria are provided.

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