agent_mesh_revoke

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing side effects. It mentions immediate removal and consequences (stops appearing in the directory, stops receiving messages), but omits reversibility, permissions, or effects on existing connections. Some transparency is present, but not comprehensive.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the core action and immediate outcome. No wasted words, and the key information (removal, immediacy, directory removal) appears early.

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?

The description covers immediate effects but fails to specify how the target machine is selected, and the text is truncated. Without parameters or an output schema, the description is incomplete for safe and targeted use. It lacks broader context about the revocation process and prerequisites.

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 zero properties, yet the tool clearly requires a target machine. The description says 'another machine' but does not explain how the target is identified, leaving the agent without essential information. With no parameters, the description should clarify how the target is derived, but it does not, making this a significant gap.

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 action ('Removes another machine from this mesh') with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling mesh tools like create/invite/join/status. The scope and immediate effect are mentioned, 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 implies usage for revoking a machine from the mesh, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor any exclusions. The context of being a mesh management tool partially compensates, but explicit when-to-use details are missing.

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