swarm_leave

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true, and the description adds the behavior of the 'force' parameter for leaving even as a manager. However, it does not discuss side effects like service disruption or node demotion, which would enhance transparency.

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 concise (three lines), front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence adds value. There is no unnecessary information.

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 low complexity (one parameter) and presence of annotations, the description covers the essential behavior. The return value is mentioned. It could mention prerequisites or post-conditions, but overall it is adequately complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the 'force' parameter: 'Force leave even if the node is a manager'. This adds meaning beyond the schema's type-only definition.

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 'Leave the current swarm' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like swarm_join, swarm_init, and swarm_inspect by specifying leaving the swarm.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, such as being a member of a swarm, or when not to use it (e.g., if you are the only manager). No comparisons to sibling tools are provided.

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