reconnect_client

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'Force a client to reconnect' conveys that the action actively drops and re-establishes the client session, which is the core side effect. It does not explicitly warn about temporary disconnection or how offline clients are handled, leaving some transparency implicit.

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 entire definition is one short sentence with no filler or duplicated schema content. It leads with the action, then adds the roaming use case in a compact parenthetical.

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 single-parameter, low-complexity action, the core inputs and purpose are covered. A brief note on expected impact, such as the client temporarily disconnecting, would make it more complete, but no critical invocation detail is missing.

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 schema already documents 'mac' as the MAC address of the client to reconnect with 100% coverage. The description introduces no additional syntax, validation, or semantic detail for the parameter. Baseline 3 applies because the schema handles the parameter documentation burden.

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 opens with the imperative 'Force a client to reconnect', naming a specific verb and resource. It is distinguishable from sibling device-level actions like reboot_device and cycle_poe_port because it targets the client's network session. The parenthetical 'useful for roaming' adds a concrete purpose.

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?

'Useful for roaming' provides a clear context in which the tool should be used, signaling the agent to reach for it when a client is not roaming correctly. It does not name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it falls slightly short of full exclusion guidance.

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