Revoke Google Health OAuth Access

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that the local token file is deleted, which is useful behavioral context. It also reinforces the need for explicit user intent, addressing safety. However, it does not describe post-revocation effects like requiring re-authentication.

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?

Two sentences: first states the action, second provides usage guard. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with the core behavior. Extremely efficient.

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 the tool's simplicity (one optional param, output schema exists, annotations cover destructiveness), the description covers purpose, usage restriction, and immediate effect. Could mention irreversibility or need for re-authentication, but overall sufficient for safe 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but only one optional parameter (response_format) exists, which is self-explanatory from its name and enum. The description does not reference this parameter or add any meaning beyond the schema. While trivial, it fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'Revoke the current Google OAuth grant and delete the local token file', indicating the exact action and resource. Among sibling tools focused on authentication setup or data retrieval, this is the only revoke tool, distinguishing it clearly.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use only when the user explicitly wants to disconnect Google Health' and 'Gated: requires explicit user intent — agents must not call this autonomously', providing clear conditions for use and when to avoid it.

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