drop

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses the most non-obvious trait: partial-failure semantics, where busy sessions are kept and their job id is reported. It omits what happens to the underlying processes and whether the operation is reversible, which prevents a 5.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and a qualifier that keeps the busy-session guarantee prominent. The phrasing is telegraphic ('Free idle sessions') but nothing is wasted.

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 two-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers the drop scope, the refusal behavior, and the job id feedback, so an agent can call it and interpret the result. It could say more about side effects on running processes, but nothing critical is missing.

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% and both parameters are documented there. The description restates that all=true covers every idle session, adding confirmation but no syntax or interaction detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Concrete verb plus resource: frees idle sessions and states the scope of 'idle'. The bare name 'drop' is ambiguous, but the description resolves it immediately. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like reset or interrupt, so it stops short of 5.

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 condition for all=true is stated, and the refusal of busy sessions is implied as the boundary. There is no explicit routing to alternatives such as interrupt or reset when a session is busy, so the agent must infer which sibling to use.

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