disconnect_router

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action (disconnect) and the transport (SSH), but does not elaborate on effects such as whether any ongoing operations are interrupted, whether the session is closed cleanly, or if there are prerequisites (e.g., existing connection). The behavior is simple and the description is not misleading, but it lacks depth beyond the literal action.

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, direct sentence with no filler. It immediately states the action and the target, earning its place without superfluous information.

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 (no parameters, no output schema), the description fully covers what an agent needs to know: the action (disconnect), the target (currently connected OpenWrt router), and the transport (SSH). There are no complex side effects or return values to document.

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?

This tool has zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter information. It appropriately omits any parameter semantics since there are none to clarify.

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 uses a specific verb ('Disconnect'), clearly identifies the resource ('currently connected OpenWrt router'), and adds the context 'SSH', which distinguishes it from serial disconnection. This clearly separates it from sibling tools like disconnect_serial and represents a distinct action.

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 clearly implies the scenario: use when connected via SSH and you want to close that connection. The parenthetical '(SSH)' provides clear context and differentiates from serial connections, though it does not explicitly mention alternative tools or exclusions. This meets the 'clear context, no exclusions' level.

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