gdrive_disconnect

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the key behavioral effect and its reversibility: the folder's tools stop reading it 'until the user turns it back on'. It does not confirm whether files or credentials are left untouched, whether other folders are affected, or how the toggle is persisted.

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 visible text is a single front-loaded clause that gets to the point immediately, with no filler. However, it terminates mid-word, so the statement is not merely concise but unfinished, which is a structural defect.

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?

A zero-parameter, no-output-schema toggle needs little description, and the effect is conveyed. Still, the truncated text leaves gaps an agent would want closed: confirmation the operation is non-destructive, and which sibling tool re-enables the folder.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The description's mention of 'one folder' is the only hint about how the target is identified, which the parameterless schema leaves entirely to context.

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 ('Turns one Google Drive folder off') with an explicit scope of 'one folder', which separates it from account-level disconnects like onedrive_disconnect, and from gdrive_delete_file because nothing is deleted. The sentence is truncated mid-word, so the stated purpose is clear but visibly incomplete.

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 is only implied: the reader infers you call this to stop Local MCP from reading a folder. It never names an alternative such as gdrive_set_scope for re-enabling or broader scope changes, nor does it state prerequisites or when-not to use it.

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