Disconnect account

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It explicitly warns that disconnecting cascades to pending schedules, comment automation, inbox, goals, and agents, while clarifying that published history is kept. It does not cover permission requirements or reversibility, but the major destructive side effect is transparently stated.

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?

Two sentences, with the action first and consequences second. Every word contributes value, with no redundancy or filler.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the core action and the most important side effects. It could briefly state what 'disconnect' means operationally, but the cascading detail already gives an agent enough to predict the outcome.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the single accountId parameter. It does not explicitly define what accountId is or where to find it, though it is inferable from the tool name and text. The description adds no format, source, or validation detail.

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 states a clear verb and resource ('Disconnect an account') and adds distinguishing details about cascading effects and retained history. This clearly separates it from siblings like connect_account or refresh_account.

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?

Usage is implied: use this when you need to disconnect an account. However, there is no explicit 'use when', no mention of when not to use it, and no alternatives are suggested. The cascading behavior hints at consequences, but not at when the tool should be selected over others.

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