Close an active SSH connection to a specified server, or terminate all connections at once.
断开 SSH 连接
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "disconnect"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| host | No | 服务器地址 | |
| port | No | SSH 端口 | |
| username | No | 用户名 | |
| all | No | 断开所有连接 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.8.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description provides no behavioral details beyond the name. It doesn't disclose side effects, error conditions, or requirements (e.g., must have an active connection). With no annotations, the description carries full burden but fails to add transparency.
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?
Extremely concise (one phrase). Front-loaded but may be too brief; could be expanded to a sentence without losing conciseness.
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?
Adequate for a simple action with no output schema, but lacks details on behavior when 'all' is true or when parameters don't match a connection. More context would improve completeness.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it doesn't mention parameters at all.
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 '断开 SSH 连接' clearly states the action and resource (disconnect SSH connection). It distinguishes from siblings like 'connect' and 'list_active_connections'. However, it could be more specific about targeting individual connections vs all.
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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., 'connect', 'list_active_connections'). Missing context about prerequisites or when not to use.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.