exit_ise_session

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavior. It adds useful context about the 409 conflict with create_ise_session. However, 'settle it' is vague and it doesn't mention side effects, idempotency, or what the tool returns.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every word contributes value (including the useful 409 caveat). No wasted text.

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 simple tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the primary purpose and a key behavioral consequence. However, it leaves 'settle it' undefined and doesn't explain return values, which is a notable gap given the absence of an output schema.

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 100% — both auth_token and payment_signature have detailed descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 ('End') and the resource ('active interactive sandbox session'). It differentiates from sibling tools like create_ise_session and end_sdac_session by specifying that it's for ISE sessions, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly says to call it 'when you are done' and provides a concrete consequence of not calling it (create_ise_session returns 409 SESSION_EXISTS). While it doesn't name alternative tools, the context makes usage clear.

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