reconnect

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden. It usefully discloses that credentials are reused (no auth prompt needed) and that re-homing to a new host is possible, but says nothing about what happens to the prior connection, failure modes, or whether the change is reversible.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the scope ('reusing stored credentials') and the optional argument are both packed efficiently into one line.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, but for a state-changing connection tool with zero annotation coverage the description is thin on prerequisites and side effects. It covers the basics but leaves an agent guessing about session state and error behavior.

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 coverage is 0% for both parameters. The description only glosses the `new_host` parameter as 'optionally to a new IP' (and calls it IP where the schema says host), and never mentions the `name` parameter or its default of 'router', so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb (reconnect) and resource (a session), plus the key differentiator from plain `connect`: it reuses stored credentials and can optionally target a new host. An agent can distinguish it from siblings like connect/disconnect, though it never names them.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the 'reusing stored credentials' clause suggests it applies when an existing session's credentials are still valid, but there is no explicit when/when-not guidance and no named alternative (e.g. use `connect` when credentials have changed).

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