Remove a connection

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates the destructive nature of the operation ('Removes') but does not state whether the action is permanent, requires special permissions, or has side effects on related data.

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 filler. It adds the useful 'by vanity name' detail beyond the title while remaining perfectly concise.

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 simple one-parameter removal tool, the description provides the core operation and the parameter meaning. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the agent is left without information about irreversibility, side effects, or what a successful removal returns.

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 schema provides no description for vanityName, so the description's 'by vanity name' adds necessary meaning and correctly maps to the only parameter. However, it does not clarify what a vanity name looks like or any format constraints, leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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 operation ('Removes') and the resource ('a connection'), and identifies the key used ('vanity name'). It is clear enough to distinguish from sibling tools like connect or get_connections_summary, though it does not explicitly name any alternative.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus related tools such as connect, respond_invitation, or remove_skill. There is no mention of prerequisites, ownership requirements, or situations where removal would be inappropriate.

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