kick_mqtt_client

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose if this is destructive (likely yes), requires specific permissions, has side effects (e.g., message loss), rate limits, or error conditions (e.g., invalid client ID).

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 the tool's complexity (destructive action, 1 parameter), lack of annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to address key aspects like parameter meaning, behavioral traits, or expected outcomes, leaving significant gaps for agent understanding.

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%, and the description adds no parameter semantics beyond the schema. It mentions 'by client ID' but doesn't clarify that the 'request' parameter is the client ID, its format, or constraints, leaving the single required parameter undocumented.

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 specific action ('Disconnect') and target resource ('a client from the MQTT broker by client ID'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_mqtt_client' (retrieve) and 'list_mqtt_clients' (enumerate) by focusing on termination of connections.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., client must be connected), exclusions, or compare with sibling tools like 'publish_mqtt_message' for messaging versus disconnection.

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