adb_disconnect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states that disconnection occurs, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., whether it affects adb server, requires prior connection, handles errors gracefully). This is insufficient for a mutation 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 that is concise, front-loaded with the action, and contains no superfluous words.

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 tool's simplicity (1 optional parameter, no output schema), the description is fairly complete. It explains the primary function and parameter effect. It could mention being the inverse of 'adb_connect' for additional context.

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 has 100% coverage and documents the 'host' parameter with pattern and description. The description adds value by explaining that omitting the parameter disconnects all devices, which is not explicitly in the schema but aligns with the optional nature.

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' and the resource 'wireless device', and distinguishes between disconnecting a specific device (when host is provided) or all devices (when no host is specified). This contrasts well with sibling tools like 'adb_connect'.

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 when to use: to disconnect from a wireless device or all devices. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the context of sibling tools (e.g., adb_connect) provides sufficient guidance.

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