disconnect_ghl_mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention side effects, reversibility, idempotency, or what happens to existing MCP connections. The action 'disconnect' implies a state change but does not explain the consequences.

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 redundant wording. Every word contributes to stating the action, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 simplicity (0 params, no output schema), the description covers the basic operation but lacks context about the connection lifecycle, how it affects other MCP tools, or the ability to reconnect. It is adequate but not fully complete for an agent deciding whether to invoke it.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is no need for parameter explanation. Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 is appropriate when the schema is empty and no parameters need semantic clarification.

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 'Disconnect' with a clear resource 'GoHighLevel MCP server', which distinguishes it from siblings like connect_ghl_mcp and ghl_mcp_status. However, it lacks detail on what exactly is disconnected (e.g., session, connection), which could lead to minor 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or the relationship to connect_ghl_mcp. Usage is only implied by the tool name and the action itself, with no explicit context.

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