metaplex-nft_revokeAuthority

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions irreversibility for 'some types' but does not specify which types or the consequences, leaving a significant gap. Important information about required permissions, state changes, and permanent effects is missing.

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 short sentence that is front-loaded and efficient. It contains no unnecessary words, but it could be slightly more informative while remaining 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?

Given the tool's action (revoking authority) and the presence of many sibling tools, the description is too minimal. It does not explain return values, prerequisites, or detailed behavior. The irreversibility note is vague. More context is needed for a mutating tool with significant implications.

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 67% (two of three parameters have descriptions). The description does not add meaning beyond the schema. The irreversibility note vaguely relates to authorityType but does not indicate which types are irreversible, so no additional semantic value is provided.

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 action ('Revoke (remove) a specific authority') and includes an important nuance about irreversibility. The tool name and description together effectively distinguish it from the sibling delegateAuthority, as revoking is the opposite of delegating.

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 alternatives. It lacks explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or reference to sibling tools like delegateAuthority. The irreversibility hint is a warning but not a usage guideline.

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