Datasets Delete Connection Grant

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description doesn't need to argue that this is a write. It adds genuinely non-redundant context: the confirm=True gate, which matters because confirm defaults to false and a caller that omits it will fail. It does not state irreversibility or what confirm actually guards against, keeping it below 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?

Two short sentences, no filler. The action leads, and the prerequisite plus the dependency pointer follow immediately.

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 mutation with an output schema already present, the essentials are covered: what it deletes, the confirm gate, and where the ID comes from. A note on whether the deletion is permanent or whether failures return errors versus silent no-ops would make it complete.

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 carries the burden. It explains the confirm parameter's required value and implies where grant_id comes from, but says nothing about connection_id semantics or the format of grant_id, leaving two of three parameters undocumented.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Delete a grant from a connection'), which separates it from the many list/get siblings and from datasets_delete_connection_path_grant by naming the grant scope explicitly. It does not call out that sibling by name, so differentiation is implicit rather than guaranteed.

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?

'Requires confirm=True' states a hard prerequisite, and 'Retrieve grant IDs with datasets_list_connection_grants' names the sibling that produces the required identifier. That is clear when-to-use and how-to-prepare guidance; only an explicit exclusion (e.g. use delete_connection_path_grant for path grants) is missing.

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