Deregister the user's Claude persona and stop the runner

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

The description details every step performed (kill process, unload plist, delete DNS record, archive keypair, remove active file), which adds substantial context beyond annotations. No contradiction with annotations; the destructive and non-read-only nature is clearly conveyed.

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 well-structured: a one-line summary, a numbered list of steps, a usage note, and a parameter description. Every sentence serves a purpose, and the most critical information is front-loaded.

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?

Given no output schema, the description covers the full effect of deregistration—on processes, DNS, and local files—plus the precondition for re-registration. It lacks explicit mention of return values or error cases, but for a tool with clear side effects, this is adequate.

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 covers the single optional parameter (keep_keypair) with a clear description. The tool description reinforces this by explaining its effect in step 4, adding context about default behavior (renaming vs. preserving). With 100% schema coverage, the description still adds meaningful nuance.

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 title and description clearly state the tool deregisters a persona and stops the runner. It lists specific steps and contrasts with the sibling zyndai_register_persona, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly states when to use: 'when the user wants to switch personas or stop being reachable on the network.' It also notes that after deregistration, zyndai_register_persona can be called again. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it (e.g., for updating persona, use zyndai_update_persona), though the sibling list provides context.

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