broker_disconnect

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

The description discloses the destructive side effect of wiping session data, which is crucial given the absence of annotations. However, it does not elaborate on broader consequences, such as impacted orders or token invalidation, which could be important for the agent to know.

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 that front-loads the action and notes the side effect. It contains no redundant information and is immediately scannable.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the core action and side effect. It lacks details on return values or error conditions, but those are less critical for a disconnect operation, and the sibling tools provide enough context.

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 has a single 'broker' parameter with an enum, and the description does not add specific semantic meaning beyond the schema. It mentions 'a broker' in general terms but does not explicitly tie the parameter to the action or describe selection implications, failing to compensate for the 0% 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 uses the verb 'disconnect' and identifies the resource as 'a broker', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like broker_connect and broker_status. The additional phrase 'wipe session data' further clarifies the scope of the 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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool or when not to. It does not mention that it is the inverse of broker_connect or that it should be used when ending a broker session, leaving usage to be inferred.

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