Datasets Delete Connection

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety bar is lowered. The description adds genuine value beyond that by spelling out the downstream consequence: workbooks and data models built on the connection lose their source. It doesn't cover irreversibility or permissions, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the prerequisite, then the consequence. Every sentence earns its place with no 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 destructive two-parameter tool with annotations and an output schema, the description covers the essential confirm requirement and the destructive consequence. It stops short of stating permanence or permission requirements, but is otherwise complete enough to call correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does so for the critical parameter by requiring confirm=True, which the schema only shows as a boolean defaulting to false. connection_id is left unexplained, but its name is reasonably self-evident.

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 clear verb+resource ('Delete a connection') and adds scope via the consequence sentence, which helps distinguish it from sibling delete operations like datasets_delete_connection_grant. The opening sentence alone is close to restating the name, but the follow-up adds real differentiating scope.

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?

It states a concrete usage prerequisite ('Requires confirm=True'), which is useful since the schema default is false. However, it doesn't say when to prefer this over alternatives (e.g., datasets_sync_connection, grants) or note exclusions, leaving usage largely implied.

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