pinterest_disconnect

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

The description discloses that the tool securely removes locally stored authorization data and explicitly states that tokens are not returned. However, it does not address whether server-side tokens are revoked or what happens if no connection exists, though the focus on 'locally stored' implies a local-only operation.

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, concise sentence of about 12 words. It is front-loaded with the action ('removes') and includes the key scope ('locally stored') and a behavioral caveat ('without returning tokens') without any waste.

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 (no parameters, no output schema), the description covers the essential behavior. It could be enhanced by noting whether the server-side token remains valid, but it gives sufficient context for the agent to understand the tool's purpose and scope.

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?

This tool has zero parameters, and the input schema is empty. Therefore, there are no parameter semantics to explain, and the description does not need to add any parameter-related information.

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 uses the specific verb 'removes' and clearly identifies the resource as 'locally stored Pinterest OAuth authorization data'. It also clarifies that it does not return tokens, distinguishing it from sibling tools like pinterest_get_authorization_url.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings. There is no mention of alternatives or conditions for use, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name and context.

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