Revoke Strava OAuth Access

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

Description discloses both the revoke action and the deletion of the local token file, adding specificity beyond the annotations' destructiveHint. It also explains the gating requirement of explicit_user_intent, providing important safety context about the destructive nature.

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, front-loaded with the action, no filler. Every word earns its place.

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 the action, usage condition, and gating mechanism. The destructive nature is clear, though it doesn't explicitly mention irreversibility or re-authentication steps; the output schema covers return values.

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 provides descriptions for explicit_user_intent but not response_format, leaving 50% coverage. The description reinforces the intent-gating semantics but doesn't add information about response_format, though the schema's enum and default partially compensate.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'revoke' and identifies the precise resources: the OAuth access grant and the local token file. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like strava_get_auth_url or strava_connection_status.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use only when the user explicitly wants to disconnect Strava,' providing a clear condition for use. It doesn't name alternative tools but the condition is strong and unambiguous, covering both when and when-not to use.

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