token_revoke

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

No annotations provided, so description fully handles behavioral disclosure: immediate and irreversible revocation, future validation failure, error return when token manager unavailable, reason optional but logged.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no redundant words.

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?

No output schema, but description covers return shape and error case. Tool is simple (2 params, no nesting), and description addresses all necessary context: purpose, usage, behavior, parameters, return values.

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 coverage is 100%. Description adds context: token_id is from token_create's tokenId, reason is optional for audit log, beyond 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?

Description clearly states 'Permanently revoke a security token by its tokenId', specifying verb, resource, and identifier. It distinguishes from sibling tools like token_create and token_validate.

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?

Explicit use cases: 'when an agent session ends, a permission grant expires by policy, or a token may have been compromised.' Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but context is clear.

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