Отозвать подключение

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond the annotations: 'Отозванный клиент теряет доступ при следующем обновлении токена' (the revoked client loses access on next token refresh) and 'Отозвав собственную сессию, придётся входить заново' (if you revoke your own session, you'll need to log in again). These details clarify timing and self-impact not present in annotations.

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 concise, two sentences, and front-loaded with the primary action and source of the ID, followed by two important behavioral consequences. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 destructive tool with annotations, the description is complete. It covers the action, the parameter source, the timing of access revocation, and a critical self-revocation warning. No output schema is present, but the description sufficiently addresses the key context an agent needs.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description mentions the session_id should come from sessions_list, but the schema already states 'Идентификатор сессии из sessions_list.' The description adds no further semantic enrichment beyond the schema.

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: 'Завершает сессию по идентификатору из sessions_list' (Ends the session by identifier from sessions_list). This uses a specific verb and resource, and explicitly references the sibling tool sessions_list for obtaining the session ID, distinguishing it from other tools.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: to revoke a session using an ID from sessions_list. It also warns about the consequence of revoking your own session. It doesn't explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, but the reference to sessions_list serves as a guide.

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