mt_remove_connection

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action without disclosing behavioral traits. It doesn't mention if this is destructive, requires specific permissions, has side effects, or what happens upon deletion (e.g., irreversible changes). More context is needed for a mutation tool.

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, efficient sentence in Japanese that directly states the tool's action. It's front-loaded with no wasted words, making it highly concise and well-structured for its purpose.

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 complexity as a destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavior, outcomes, or error handling, which are crucial for safe invocation. More information is needed to compensate for the missing structured data.

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%, with the parameter 'connectionId' clearly documented in the schema as '削除する接続のID' (ID of the connection to delete). The description doesn't add extra meaning beyond the schema, but with only one parameter and high coverage, a baseline of 4 is appropriate as it's minimally sufficient.

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 '接続を削除します' (removes a connection) states a clear verb+resource action, but it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'mt_delete_session' or specify what type of connection is being removed. It's vague about the resource scope compared to alternatives.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'mt_delete_session' or 'mt_list_connections'. The description lacks context about prerequisites, such as needing an existing connection ID, or exclusions, leaving the agent without usage direction.

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