jms_close_terminal_session

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states that the tool not only closes the session but also expires its underlying connection token, a meaningful side effect beyond the name. However, it does not mention idempotency, permissions, or behavior on invalid handles, leaving some gaps.

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 that states the core action and a key side effect, with no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the primary verb 'Close' and avoids any 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?

The tool is simple, and the output schema covers return values. However, the description lacks usage guidance and parameter semantics, and does not differentiate from the seemingly similar jms_interrupt_terminal_session. Given the absence of annotations, the description is minimally adequate but not fully 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 0%, with only one parameter (session_handle). The description does not explain the format, provenance, or semantics of session_handle, and the schema only provides a title. Since the description must compensate for the lack of param documentation, this is a clear gap.

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+resource structure: 'Close a managed KoKo terminal session' and adds a differentiating detail about expiring the connection token. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like jms_interrupt_terminal_session and jms_close_sftp_session.

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 by stating the tool closes a session and expires its token, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this versus jms_interrupt_terminal_session or other session management tools. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned, so the context is clear but underdeveloped.

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