kura_disconnect_cloud

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It simply says 'Disconnect a cloud connection' without explaining whether this is destructive, requires an active connection, affects data transfer, or returns any status. This lack of detail is a significant gap for a mutating 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 concise sentence with no redundancy. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Disconnect' and the object, making it easy to skim. However, it is extremely minimal, bordering on under-specification, which slightly reduces the score.

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?

The tool is simple (2 parameters, no output schema), but the description lacks any contextual information about when to use it, what happens on success or failure, or how it fits into the cloud connection lifecycle. The schema covers parameters but not usage context, and the sibling tools (connect, get) suggest a richer narrative is needed.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage, with descriptions for both 'pid' and 'instance' parameters. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline score of 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?

The description states a specific action ('Disconnect') and a specific resource ('cloud connection'), which clearly conveys what the tool does and distinguishes it from siblings like kura_connect_cloud and kura_get_cloud_connections. However, it is brief and does not mention the required PID or instance parameters, though these are provided in the schema.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as kura_connect_cloud or kura_get_cloud_connections. The description does not mention prerequisites, conditions for use, or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name and schema.

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