slack_disconnect

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose real behavior beyond the name: Slack tools stop reading the service, and re-enabling requires user action outside the tool (LMCP icon). It does not state whether credentials, workspace registrations, or cached data are removed, 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?

The effect is front-loaded in a single short sentence with no filler. However, the description ends in 'from LMCP's icon →...' — an unfinished clause that weakens structure and leaves the reader unsure whether content was lost.

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 zero-parameter disconnect action with no output schema, the core information (what stops working, how to reverse it) is present. Gaps remain: whether account/credential state is deleted, whether the action is reversible without user intervention, and the truncated tail of the description.

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 the baseline of 4 applies — there is nothing parameter-level an agent needs the description to explain. The description correctly requires no argument 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 Slack off in Local MCP') plus the concrete consequence ('its tools stop reading it'), which clearly separates it from sibling tools like slack_list_workspaces and slack_search_messages. The trailing ellipsis leaves the last clause unfinished, so intent is clear but the statement is not fully closed.

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 implied by the verb 'turns off' and by the parallel disconnect_* siblings (notion_disconnect, gdrive_disconnect, signal_disconnect), and it does name the re-enable path via LMCP's icon. It never explicitly says when to choose this versus leaving Slack connected, nor any preconditions (e.g., Slack must already be connected).

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