delete_calendar_connection

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It explicitly labels the tool as a mutation ('[mutation]') and requires confirmation (confirm=true) for execution, which are key behavioral traits. However, it does not disclose whether the action is reversible or what side effects occur.

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 sentence plus a parenthetical, front-loading the purpose and key condition. Every part is essential, with 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 delete operation with no output schema, the description covers the main points: what is deleted and the confirmation requirement. However, it omits potential side effects or prerequisites (e.g., connection must exist). Given simplicity, it is mostly complete.

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 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds minimal extra meaning: 'connection_id' is restated, and 'confirm' is described as 'confirmar ejecución de esta acción peligrosa', which reinforces the need for confirmation but does not add new syntactic 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 clearly states the tool deletes a calendar provider connection (Google/Microsoft), using a specific verb 'Elimina' and resource 'conexion de proveedor de calendario'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_calendar or delete_calendar_event by specifying the target is a connection, not the calendar itself.

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 deleting a calendar connection, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_calendar. The confirmation requirement is noted, but no conditions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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