deactivate_license

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool is 'Sensitive' and requires confirmation, implying seriousness. However, it does not detail what deactivation entails (e.g., loss of features, need for reactivation) or any side effects, leaving some ambiguity.

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 extremely concise, consisting of three short phrases: 'Deactivate the current license. Sensitive. Requires confirm=true.' Every sentence serves a purpose, with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 tool with one well-documented parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core action and sensitivity. However, it lacks context on the outcome (e.g., will services stop immediately? Can it be undone?) and does not mention the sibling tool for reactivation. Slightly more detail would improve completeness.

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 parameter 'confirm' already documented as 'Must be true to execute this irreversible/sensitive action.' The tool description redundantly echoes 'Requires confirm=true' and adds 'Sensitive,' which adds minimal value beyond the schema. Baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states the tool's action: 'Deactivate the current license.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the phrase 'Sensitive' distinguishes it from sibling tools like activate_license or get_license_status, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 mentions 'Sensitive' and 'Requires confirm=true,' which implies it is a critical action requiring deliberation. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like activate_license or refresh_license, or provide guidance on prerequisites or consequences.

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