edgegate_disconnect_huggingface

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses the destructive nature ('Permanently delete'), the impact on future imports ('fall back to anonymous access'), and the authorization requirement ('Requires owner role'). This is exceptional transparency for a mutation tool.

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 description is two concise sentences. The first sentence states the action and target, and the second provides two key behavioral consequences. No wasted words.

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 simple intent with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, effect, and permission. It fully equips the agent to know when and how to invoke the tool, and what to expect afterward.

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 one required parameter, workspace_id, with no description. The description does not explicitly explain this parameter, but the parameter name is self-explanatory and the tool name reinforces the workspace context. Given the low schema coverage (0%), the description could have provided more detail, but the single parameter's purpose is clear enough.

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 tool's function: 'Permanently delete the workspace's HuggingFace integration.' It uses a specific verb ('delete') and identifies the resource ('HuggingFace integration'), making it distinct from sibling tools like edgegate_connect_huggingface or edgegate_get_huggingface_integration.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: it is for disconnecting, with the consequence that 'Future HF imports fall back to anonymous access.' It also notes the requirement for an owner role. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it falls short of a 5.

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