terminate_session

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the key trait: the operation is forced/destructive ("forcibly disconnects"). However, it says nothing about permissions required, idempotency, behavior when the session ID is invalid or already gone, or whether the user is notified — notable gaps for a destructive tool.

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 front-loaded sentence with the action and target stated immediately and no filler. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity leaves no room for the operational caveats a destructive tool would benefit from.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and there is only one simple parameter. Still, for a destructive session-termination tool with zero annotations, the description omits how to acquire the session/connection ID, permission requirements, and failure behavior.

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 single parameter. It adds the meaning "connection ID" for the target, but the schema names the field session_id while the description says "connection ID", creating ambiguity about whether these are the same identifier (a sibling get_universe_connection_id suggests they may be distinct concepts).

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 pair ("forcibly disconnects and terminates") and a specific resource ("active user session"), which is enough to separate it from read-only siblings like get_active_sessions. The qualifier "by connection ID" is clear about the targeting key, though it doesn't name any sibling explicitly.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisite (e.g., obtaining the ID from get_active_sessions), and no mention of how this differs from logout for ending a session. The agent must infer the workflow entirely from sibling names.

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