nt_disconnect

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

The description states what it does (stop client, tear down subscriptions) but doesn't disclose side effects like whether it's irreversible, whether it requires confirmation, or if it affects other clients. No annotations are present to fill this gap.

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 and to the point, with no unnecessary words. It effectively conveys the action in one sentence.

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 operation and that an output schema exists, the description is sufficiently complete. It tells what happens (client stop and subscription teardown) without needing to elaborate on return values.

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 takes no parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (empty). Since no parameters exist, the description adds no extra info, but the baseline is 3 due to high schema coverage.

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: stop the NT4 client and tear down persistent subscriptions. It distinguishes from sibling tools like nt_connect (start) and nt_subscribe (create subscriptions).

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?

It is implied this is used when the client should be stopped and subscriptions cleaned up, but it doesn't explicitly state when to prefer this over other tools or mention any prerequisites (e.g., must be connected).

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