revoke_agent_identity

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

The description explains that revocation is immediate, irreversible, retains the record for audit, and logs the write operation. However, it does not mention authentication requirements or impact on dependent resources.

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 well-structured with a clear opening, behavioral notes, and parameter list. It is concise but slightly verbose with the 'Args' block; still, every sentence adds value.

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 (one required param, no output schema), the description covers purpose, usage, behavior, and parameter semantics adequately. Minor omission: could mention success/error responses.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates by defining identity_id as a UUID and specifying its source (list_agent_identities). This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's 'string' type.

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 permanently revokes an agent identity, blocking future authentication. It distinguishes itself from rotate_agent_identity, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool (permanent revocation) and when not to (use rotate_agent_identity for key cycling). It also notes that revocation is irreversible, aiding decision-making.

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