quickbooks_disconnect

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations by detailing the OAuth revocation, connection removal, irreversibility, and required scopes. It also explains the need for explicit confirmation and an idempotency key, providing substantial behavioral context that annotations alone do not convey.

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 concise and front-loaded, with two sentences that immediately state the action and then provide essential behavioral and prerequisite details. Every sentence adds valuable information with no redundancy or filler.

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 simple disconnect tool with two fully documented parameters and clear annotations, the description covers purpose, behavior, scope requirements, and confirmation requirements. No output schema is present, but the description does not need to explain return values for this action, making it complete for the given complexity.

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 100%, and the description only reiterates the requirement for confirm:true and idempotencyKey without adding new semantic detail. It does not explain the purpose or format of the idempotencyKey beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's action with a specific verb and resource: 'Disconnect QuickBooks Online for your workspace.' It also explains the mechanism ('revokes the OAuth grant at Intuit and removes the connection'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like quickbooks_status or quickbooks_sync_to_qbo.

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 implies the primary usage scenario (disconnecting QuickBooks) and provides prerequisites such as required scopes and the need for confirm:true and idempotencyKey. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use the tool or compare it with alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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