probe_disconnect

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

Annotations indicate write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and idempotency. The description adds critical detail: behavior changes based on id presence (single vs all). No contradictions, but could mention potential errors (e.g., invalid ID) or safety concerns with closing all.

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, clear sentence that front-loads the action and covers both cases. No wasted words.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides essential behavior. It could be enhanced with error handling or return value hints, but is largely complete.

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 already covers the single parameter with full description (connection ID and omission behavior). The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. High schema coverage justifies baseline 3.

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 tool closes connections, specifying the two modes: single connection by ID or all if omitted. It effectively distinguishes from siblings like probe_connect (opening) and probe_list (listing).

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 context (closing connections) and shows two scenarios. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives, but the sibling names provide differentiation. Adequate for a simple tool.

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