Remove a workspace app credential (204)

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds genuinely new behavior: nothing is sent without confirm:true, and crucially there is no server-side dry run, so the preview is the only safety net. The 204 also tells the agent to expect an empty body. It stops short of describing auth/scope requirements or what happens if the credential does not exist.

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?

Two compact, front-loaded sentences with zero filler; the destructive gating is stated up front. The only waste is the redundant "(204)" repeated from the title and again as the response code context.

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 three-parameter destructive call with no output schema, the definition covers the safety gate well. What is missing is the platform selector's meaning and any failure-mode behavior for a credential that does not exist, which matters because there is no server-side dry run to catch mistakes.

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 coverage is 67%, so confirm and idempotencyKey are already documented in the schema, and the description's note about confirm largely restates that. The required platform parameter, backed by a very large enum with no description, gets no semantic explanation in the description — nothing about which credential is targeted or what happens if the platform has no stored credential.

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 states a specific verb and resource ("Remove a workspace app credential") and pins down the exact endpoint (DELETE /v1/app-credentials/{platform}) plus the expected 204 response. It is clearly distinguishable in intent from appCredentials_list and appCredentials_set, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

Usage context is only implied by the verb and HTTP method; there is no explicit statement of when to use this versus appCredentials_set (e.g. whether set overwrites or this is the only way to revoke). The confirm:true requirement is the one concrete operative instruction.

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