Disconnect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Disconnect cleanly' gestures at graceful teardown but does not say whether the application process is terminated, what happens to unsaved work, whether the connection can be re-established via zemax_connect, or what errors are possible.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and no wasted words. It is efficient, though terse to the point of under-specification rather than genuinely complete.

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 session-terminating tool with zero annotation coverage and no output schema, the definition says nothing about irreversible effects, unsaved-state handling, or the post-disconnect state. An agent cannot tell whether this is a safe, reversible operation.

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 100% and the single optional 'save' flag is already documented as 'Save before disconnecting'. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (disconnect/close) and resource (owned OpticStudio application), and the word 'owned' hints at a scope distinction versus tools like zemax_close_file. It does not explicitly name a sibling to contrast with, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance on when to disconnect versus zemax_close_file, zemax_restart, or simply leaving the session open. The only implicit signal is that this ends a session, which the agent must infer from the word 'disconnect'.

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