Delete share link bundle

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

Annotations already establish destructive, non-readOnly, non-idempotent behavior, and the description adds valuable specificity: revocation is immediate, it affects every document in the bundle, and the documents themselves are untouched. This clarifies exactly what is destroyed beyond what the annotations convey, and does not contradict them.

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 no filler; the action and immediate effect are front-loaded, and the 'documents themselves are untouched' clause earns its place by preventing a common confusion with document deletion.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with strong annotations, the description is almost complete: it states the scope and limits of destruction clearly. The only meaningful gap is that it does not define or point to how the required id is obtained, which would make invocation fully self-contained.

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%, and the description does not explain the meaning of the id parameter beyond the tool's name. It neither states that id is the share link bundle's identifier nor says how to obtain it, so it fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 ('Revoke') and resource ('share link bundle'), and immediately clarifies the consequence: every document in the bundle stops being publicly reachable. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like delete_share_link and delete_document, which affect different objects.

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 when to use it—whenever a share link bundle needs to be revoked—and states the immediate effect. However, it gives no explicit when-not-to-use guidance and does not mention alternatives such as delete_share_link for revoking a single link.

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