disconnect_bluetooth

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

Annotations already disclose readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say whether pairing is retained, what happens if the MAC is unknown or not connected, or what the response looks like.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler; the verb, resource, and identifier are all stated immediately.

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 command with full schema coverage and annotations, the definition is minimally adequate. It omits failure behavior (unknown MAC, already-disconnected device) and any indication of return value, which leaves an agent guessing about edge cases.

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% and the single parameter is already documented as the device MAC address. The phrase 'by MAC address' in the description merely mirrors the schema, adding no new syntax or format 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 names a specific verb and resource ('Disconnect a bluetooth device') and the identifier used ('by MAC address'), so an agent can tell it apart from connect_bluetooth or list_bluetooth_devices. It stops short of explicitly differentiating itself from toggle_bluetooth, which also changes connection state.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb – disconnect when you want to drop a connection – but there is no guidance on when to use this versus toggle_bluetooth, nor any precondition such as the device needing to be currently connected. No exclusions or alternatives are named.

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