disconnect_database_users

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must explain behavioral consequences. It mentions 'setting access mode' but fails to disclose critical effects like active transactions being rolled back (as hinted by the rollbackImmediate parameter) or the fact that new connections may be blocked. This is a significant gap for a disruptive operation.

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 core action and use case, with no filler or repetition.

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 lack of annotations, an output schema, and the disruptive nature of the operation, the description is incomplete. It does not explain risks, side effects, or what happens to active sessions and transactions. The schema covers parameters, but the broader behavioral context is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are fully described in the schema. The description adds little beyond the schema, only loosely linking the mode parameter to the mechanism. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Disconnect all users from a database'), specifies the mechanism ('by setting access mode'), and provides a concrete use case ('useful before restore'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like kill_database_sessions, which might terminate individual sessions rather than altering access mode.

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 phrase 'useful before restore' gives clear context for when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though the context implies it is intended for pre-restore scenarios.

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