vpn_disconnect

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

The description adds no behavioral details beyond the annotations. While idempotentHint and destructiveHint are declared, the description doesn't explain what disconnecting entails (e.g., terminates the active session, safe when already disconnected), so it fails to enrich the annotation-provided safety profile.

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 one-sentence description is extremely concise and front-loaded, with every word contributing to clarity. There is no redundancy or filler, making it an efficient and effective statement of purpose.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. However, it doesn't state what happens if no VPN connection is active, though the idempotentHint annotation indirectly covers this, so the completeness is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is fully covered by default. Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 is appropriate when no parameters exist, and the description adds no unnecessary parameter-related text.

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 'Disconnect NordVPN' clearly specifies the action (disconnect) and the target resource (NordVPN), making it unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like vpn_connect and vpn_status.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks context about prerequisites, typical scenarios, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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