remove_connection

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

The destructiveHint annotation already flags the write/delete nature, so the bar is lower; the description adds real context beyond it by scoping the removal to connections 'registered in this session' and disclosing the precondition that the active connection is protected. It stops short of describing failure behavior or any persistence effects.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the constraint is placed inline where it matters. It is arguably too terse, but nothing in it is wasted.

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, single-parameter tool with no output schema and only a destructiveHint annotation, the description covers the essential guard but omits error conditions and any statement of what state remains afterward. Adequate but with clear 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?

There is one required parameter ('name') with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions how the connection is identified or what form the name takes. The noun 'conexión' loosely implies the target, but the parameter itself is left entirely unexplained.

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 specific verb ('Elimina') and resource ('una conexión registrada en esta sesión'), which clearly separates it from add_connection, list_connections and select_connection by action. It does not name a sibling explicitly, but the operation is unambiguous.

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?

It supplies a genuine exclusion — the connection cannot be the active one — which tells the agent when this tool will fail. However, it never says when to use this versus select_connection or add_connection, so routing guidance is only implied.

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