remove_connection

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly reveals the destructive side effect of removing all associated devices, which is important beyond the basic 'remove' action. It does not, however, mention irreversibility or permissions.

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 two short, front-loaded sentences. The first states the core action, the second adds a critical side effect. No filler or repetition.

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 destructive tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains what it does and the key side effect. It could mention the return value or error cases, but the core context is sufficiently covered.

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 already provides a clear description for the 'id' parameter (including how to find it via list_connections), covering 100% of the parameters. The tool description itself does not add further parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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: '移除一个通讯连接' (remove a communication connection) and adds a specific side effect: '同时会移除该连接上注册的所有设备' (also removes all devices registered on that connection). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'disconnect_relay' or 'list_connections'.

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 provides clear context for use by stating the main action and the cascading side effect, which implicitly warns the agent not to use this tool if devices should be preserved. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions.

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