close_all_sessions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention that this is a bulk destructive action, that it will kill all sessions including those with running commands, or that it is irreversible. This is a significant gap for a potentially disruptive operation.

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, clear sentence: 'Close all active SSH sessions.' It contains no extraneous words or repetition, and the critical information (action + scope) is front-loaded and immediately comprehensible.

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 no-parameter tool, the description is mostly complete in stating what it does. However, given its destructive nature and the presence of a safer sibling tool (close_session), the description should mention the broader impact (e.g., closing all sessions, potentially interrupting running commands) and guide users toward the appropriate tool for single-session closures. Without this, the completeness is adequate but has clear gaps.

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, and the input schema is an empty object. Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 is appropriate when there are 0 parameters, as there is nothing for the description to add beyond the schema. The description correctly implies no parameters are needed.

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 'Close all active SSH sessions' uses a specific verb (close) and resource (all active SSH sessions), clearly distinguishing it from the sibling tool close_session, which handles a single session. The word 'all' makes the scope explicit and unambiguous.

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: use this tool when you need to close every active SSH session, rather than a specific one. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like close_session or provide any when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance. The context from the sibling list helps, but the description itself lacks explicit direction.

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