terminate_authorization

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

Annotations mark destructiveHint=true, and the description reinforces this by describing session termination. It adds the behavioral constraint that current=true sessions are protected, which is valuable beyond annotations. It lacks details on side effects or irreversibility, but the destructive nature is clear.

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 short sentences, entirely relevant, with the action and critical exception front-loaded. 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 single-parameter destructive tool, the description covers the action, parameter origin, and an important restriction. An output schema exists, so return-value description is unnecessary. It is sufficiently complete for agents to invoke correctly.

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 provides no description for hash_str (0% coverage), but the description explains it is the hash from get_authorizations, giving essential context. This compensates for the schema gap, though it does not elaborate on format or other constraints.

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 uses a specific verb 'terminate' with the resource 'another's active session' and identifies the hash source. It explicitly distinguishes from siblings by noting that own sessions (current=true) cannot be terminated.

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 clearly states to use the hash from get_authorizations and that current sessions cannot be terminated, providing an explicit exclusion. However, it does not name an alternative tool for terminating one's own session, 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.