Workbooks Delete Workbook Grant

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds the non-obvious operational constraint that confirm=True is mandatory (the schema only shows a default of false with no description), which is genuine extra context; it does not address irreversibility or what happens to the grantee's access.

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, the destructive action and its scope first, the prerequisite second. 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?

Covers what is removed, the confirmation gate, and how to obtain the ID; an output schema exists so return values need no explanation. The only gap is that the permanent nature of the deletion is left implicit for a destructive tool.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden and does meaningful work: it explains the confirm flag's role and tells the agent where grant_id comes from. workbook_id remains unexplained and the grant_id format is only implied.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a grant ... from a workbook') and defines what a grant is (a user's or team's permission), which makes it unmistakable against sibling listing tools like workbooks_list_workbook_grants.

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?

Gives a concrete prerequisite workflow — retrieve grant IDs with workbooks_list_workbook_grants — and states the confirm=True requirement. It stops short of explicit when-not-to-use guidance or warning that the deletion is permanent.

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