akb_revoke

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only mentions a prerequisite. It does not disclose what happens upon revocation (e.g., immediate effect, reversibility, impact on active sessions). The agent lacks key behavioral context beyond the mutation implied by 'revoke'.

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?

Extremely concise: one sentence for the action and one short condition. No unnecessary words. Perfectly sized for quick reading.

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 output schema and no annotations, the description fails to explain return values, error handling, or post-conditions. For a mutation tool, more context (e.g., success indication, idempotency) is needed. The prerequisite is the only additional context.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both parameters ('Vault name', 'Target username'). The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action 'Revoke a user's vault access' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like akb_grant (which adds access) and akb_vault_members (which lists members). The purpose is immediately understandable.

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?

Description provides a prerequisite ('You must be owner or admin') but does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., akb_delete_vault, akb_transfer_ownership). No explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool guidance is given.

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