bond_end

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

The description clearly states the tool ends the session and clears pending transfers, which is useful behavioral info. However, it does not disclose potential side effects like data loss or confirmation requirements. Given no annotations, the description carries full burden and is mostly adequate.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, no wasted words, immediately front-loads the key action. Every sentence earns its place.

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 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main action (end session, disconnect, clear transfers). It lacks details about error states or prerequisites, but the action is straightforward, so completeness is high.

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 has no parameters, so schema coverage is 100% by default. The description does not need to add parameter meaning. According to guidelines, baseline is 4 for 0 parameters, and the description meets this bar.

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 tool ends the current Covalent Bond session, disconnects from relay, and clears pending transfers. It uses a specific verb (end) and resource (session), and distinguishes from siblings (bond_accept, bond_decline, bond_join, bond_send) which handle other actions.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites or when not to use it. While sibling names imply usage contexts, the description lacks direct recommendations.

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