Disconnect Fluent

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

Annotations already signal destructiveness (destructiveHint=true). The description adds useful context not present in annotations: the two possible behaviors (detach vs close) and the scope limitation to MCP-launched instances. This is meaningful additional context.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It conveys the core functionality efficiently.

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 simple exit tool with strong annotations, a schema-documented parameter, and an output schema, the description is mostly sufficient. It could add a note about being the standard way to end a Fluent session, but it covers the essential behavior without redundancy.

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 coverage is 100%: the only parameter 'shutdown_attached' has its own description. The tool description adds no information about parameters, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 'Detach from Fluent or close an MCP-launched instance' clearly states the action and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by being the only Fluent exit/disconnect tool, but the dual 'detach or close' wording introduces slight ambiguity.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention that this should be used to end a Fluent session or how to decide between detach and close beyond the parameter schema. No alternatives or exclusions are discussed.

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