disconnect_from_mechanical

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses that the default is non-destructive (session stays alive) and that shutdown=True closes Mechanical with loss of unsaved work. That destructive side-effect warning is exactly what an agent needs, though it doesn't cover reversibility or auth requirements.

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 primary action and its default scope are front-loaded in the first clause, with parameter detail following. It is compact and waste-free, though the inline 'Args:' formatting is slightly less scannable than a clean sentence.

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?

This is a simple one-parameter tool with an output schema, so return values need no explanation. Purpose, default behavior, and the destructive effect of the optional flag are all present; only permission/auth context for a session-ending operation 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the lone 'shutdown' parameter, and it does: it explains that True closes Mechanical itself and loses unsaved work. The schema supplies default=false, and 'leaving the session running' confirms the default semantics, so meaning is fully conveyed.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Disconnect from Mechanical') with the crucial scope qualifier that the session keeps running by default. This cleanly separates it from connect_to_mechanical and check_mechanical_connection without needing to inspect any schema.

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 the disconnect scenario and clarifies default behavior (session left running), but never explicitly states when to use this versus checking the connection or simply ending work. No exclusions or prerequisites are given, so guidance is inferred rather than stated.

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