x_api_delete_connections_by_uuids

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden and does so well. It discloses that the operation is mutating and high-risk, explains environment-selection behavior for scopeTenantId/scopeUserId/scopeAccountId, describes expected response shape, common failure conditions, and includes explicit safety warnings about validating scope and payload before use.

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 organized into clearly labeled sections and front-loads the core purpose. The 'Use when: Terminate multiple connections' line is redundant, and the overall length is substantial, but every section adds useful operational detail. It is well-structured and not padded with fluff.

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?

The description is quite thorough for a complex mutation tool: it covers risk, prerequisites, environment-selection, response shape, failure modes, safety, and the example. The main gap is that it never specifies what the 'documented request payload' in body should contain, which is important for actually deleting connections by UUIDs. Still, it provides far more contextual detail than the schema alone.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds valuable semantics by explaining that scopeTenantId plus exactly one of scopeUserId/scopeAccountId selects the auth principal, credentialKey selects a non-default credential profile, and body carries the request payload. However, it does not describe preferredAuthType or the exact structure of the body payload, which limits completeness.

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 opens with 'Terminate multiple connections,' which is a clear verb+resource pairing. However, it does not explicitly mention 'by UUIDs' or contrast with sibling deletion tools like x_api_delete_all_connections and x_api_delete_connections_by_endpoint, so it does not fully distinguish itself within the description itself.

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 provides explicit usage guidance: 'Use when: Terminate multiple connections' and a 'Do not use when' section that directs agents away from exploratory use and toward x_schema_discovery or x_query_suggestion. It also lists recommended prerequisite and follow-up tools and required permissions, making when-to-use conditions very clear.

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