ensp_close_all_sessions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about the fact that this is a bulk destructive operation that will terminate every active session, including any in-flight command or configuration workflow. For a tool that affects all connections at once, this silence is a meaningful gap.

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?

A single short sentence with no waste and the core action front-loaded. It is appropriately sized for a zero-parameter tool, though it is terse to the point of omitting any caution.

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?

With no parameters and an output schema that covers return values, the description only needs to convey behavioral impact. It does not, leaving the agent unaware that this closes every session indiscriminately, which is the one thing that matters for this tool.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond what the empty schema already communicates. Baseline 4 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('关闭所有会话' / close all sessions), and the 'all' scope hints at the distinction from cleanup_idle_sessions. However, it never names or contrasts the sibling tools (disconnect_device, cleanup_idle_sessions) that an agent would otherwise confuse it with.

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 indication of when this tool should be used versus per-session disconnection or idle cleanup, and no prerequisites or cautions are given. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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