ble_disconnect

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full disclosure burden but only states 'disconnect'. It does not describe side effects (e.g., freeing resources), return values, or error conditions, leaving the agent uninformed about behavioral traits.

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, front-loaded sentence of 9 words with no wasted content. However, it could slightly expand on usage context without becoming verbose.

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 tool (one required param, no output schema), the description is adequate but minimally complete. It lacks context about what the disconnect entails (e.g., whether it frees the connection ID) or post-conditions, which would help an agent assess completeness of action.

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 input schema covers 100% of the single parameter (connection_id) with a description; the tool description adds no extra meaning beyond restating the schema. Baseline of 3 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 clearly states the action (disconnect), the resource (BLE peripheral), and the method (by connection_id). It strongly distinguishes from sibling tools like ble_connect and ble_connection_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?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as prerequisites (e.g., must be connected) or avoiding use when already disconnected. Usage is only implied by the tool name.

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