Revoke Google Health OAuth Access

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it specifies 'delete the local token file' and 'Revoke the current Google OAuth grant', which are irreversible, destructive actions. This complements the destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true annotations without contradiction.

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 sentences: first states action, second provides usage guidance. It is front-loaded and contains no fluff. Every sentence adds value.

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?

The description covers the main action and usage guardrails. With an output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description is nearly complete for this simple destructive tool. It could optionally mention the typical return value (e.g., success message), but not required given output schema.

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 input schema has one parameter (response_format) with enum and default, and 0% schema description coverage. The description does not mention this parameter. However, the parameter is simple and non-critical for the tool's core function, so the lack of explanation is acceptable but not ideal.

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 clearly states the action: 'Revoke the current Google OAuth grant and delete the local token file.' It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying that this is for disconnecting Google Health, which is unique among over 20 sibling tools.

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?

The description explicitly states when to use: 'Use only when the user explicitly wants to disconnect Google Health.' It also warns against autonomous calls: 'Gated: requires explicit user intent — agents must not call this autonomously.' This provides clear guardrails.

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