chrome_disconnect

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states the action; it does not mention side effects, reversibility, error behavior, or what happens to the connection or ongoing operations. This is a significant gap for a state-changing 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?

The description is a single sentence with no filler, making it concise and front-loaded. However, its brevity borders on under-specification, though for a simple tool it remains appropriately sized.

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 simple schema and absence of annotations and output schema, the description should provide more context about when and why to disconnect, and what the impact is. Its minimalism leaves the tool's operational context unclear, especially within the Chrome management suite.

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 schema fully describes the only parameter (connection_id) with 100% coverage, so the description need not repeat it. The description adds no parameter-level detail, but the baseline of 3 applies because the schema handles the semantics.

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 from a Chrome instance' clearly states the action (disconnect) and the target (a Chrome instance), distinguishing it from sibling tools like chrome_connect or chrome_list_connections. It is not a tautology, though it lacks any additional scope or nuance.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like chrome_switch_connection or chrome_list_connections. No prerequisites, consequences, or exclusions are mentioned, leaving the agent without decision-making context.

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