ksef_token_revoke

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses that the operation is irreversible, requires an active session and confirmed approval, and that the token cannot be restored after revocation. This is substantial behavioral context that helps an agent avoid dangerous misuse.

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 three short sentences with no filler. The action is front-loaded first, followed by the critical warning, prerequisites, and consequence. Every sentence earns its place, including the redundant-sounding final sentence, which reinforces the irreversible nature of the operation.

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 single-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it does, prerequisites, and irreversible consequences. It does not describe the return value, but given the simplicity of the operation and the strong safety warnings, this is a minor gap rather than a serious omission.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the referenceNumber parameter already documented as 'Numer referencyjny tokena do unieważnienia'. The tool description does not add further parameter-level detail, so it does not exceed the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 opens with a specific imperative verb-resource pair, 'Unieważnij token KSeF' (revoke KSeF token), clearly identifying what the tool does. This distinguishes it from sibling token operations like ksef_token_generate, ksef_token_list, and ksef_token_get.

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 states explicit prerequisites for use: an active session and confirmed approval. This gives clear context on when the tool is appropriate, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it.

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