disconnect

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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It only states the action and the fact that a status confirmation is returned. It does not describe side effects, prerequisites, or failure behavior, which for a disconnect operation could be relevant (e.g., pending orders, session state).

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 concise, with two short sentences that directly state the purpose and the return. Both sentences serve a clear function and there is no filler.

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 simplicity of the tool (no parameters), an output schema exists, and the description provides the core action and return type, it is mostly complete. It could add a sentence about when it is appropriate to call this tool or how it relates to 'logout', but the current level is adequate for a simple disconnect action.

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, so the schema is fully covered. The description does not need to add parameter meaning beyond stating the action, which is sufficient. The baseline of 4 applies because there are no parameters.

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 the action (disconnect) and the target (trading server), making its purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'connect' and 'get_connection_status' by specifying a distinct operation.

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 when the user wants to end the connection to the trading server, but it does not provide explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. It lacks contrast with related tools such as 'logout' or 'connect', so the usage context is only partially implied.

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