onedrive_disconnect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the state effect (tools stop reading the folder) and that re-enabling requires the user to act 'in Lo[cal MCP]' rather than this tool. It says nothing about persistence, authentication, or whether the change affects other folders, and the sentence is truncated mid-thought.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler is appropriately sized. The truncated ending ('in Lo...') leaves the final clause incomplete, which slightly undermines the structure.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and no parameters, the description is the entire specification, and it stops short: the re-enable path is cut off and it omits whether the off-state persists across sessions or how it interacts with onedrive_set_scope.

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 schema has zero parameters and 100% coverage, so per the baseline this scores 4. Note that the description implies selecting 'one OneDrive folder' even though no such parameter exists, which is a mild mismatch rather than a documentation gain.

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 OneDrive folder off in Local MCP') plus the observable consequence ('its tools stop reading it'). However, it never distinguishes itself from nearby siblings like onedrive_set_scope or gdrive_disconnect, and the term 'folder' is ambiguous.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. The only hint is the stated effect (tools stop reading the folder), which leaves the agent to infer that this is the opposite of onedrive_set_scope.

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