Disconnect SSH tunnel

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations: it does not state whether disconnecting is reversible, whether it affects other tunnels, whether it requires the tunnel to be active, or what happens if the tunnelName is invalid. The description does not contradict the annotations, but it also does not enrich them.

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 extremely short: 'Disconnect SSH tunnel. Disconnects an active SSH tunnel.' The first sentence repeats the title, and the second sentence is a near-verbatim restatement. It is concise but wastes its only two sentences on redundancy rather than adding useful 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?

For a tool with one parameter, no output schema, and no parameter documentation, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how to find the tunnelName, what a successful disconnect looks like, or what errors might occur. The sibling termix_tunnels_get_all_tunnel_statuses and termix_tunnels_get_tunnel_status_name could help an agent find tunnel names, but the description does not point to them.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented tunnelName parameter. It does not. The description never mentions tunnelName, how to obtain it, or what format it should take. With one required-looking parameter and zero schema documentation, the agent is left without guidance on what value to pass.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Disconnect SSH tunnel' and 'Disconnects an active SSH tunnel.' It is not a tautology, but it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like termix_tunnels_connect_ssh_tunnel or termix_tunnels_cancel_tunnel_retry beyond the obvious opposite action. The name and title already convey the action, so the description adds little differentiation.

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 that the tunnel must be active, how to identify the tunnelName, or that termix_tunnels_connect_ssh_tunnel is the counterpart for establishing tunnels. The context is implied by the name but not explicitly stated.

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