ssh_session_close

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 explains that an unclosed session keeps its SSH connection until reaped by certificate expiry or idle/max-lifetime timeout, adding valuable lifecycle context. It does not detail idempotency or error handling, but the core behavior is well covered.

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 sentences: the first states the action directly, the second provides rationale and consequences. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 close operation with a well-documented parameter and an output schema, the description covers the purpose, when to use it, and the behavior of not using it. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 fully describes the only parameter (session_id with 'id of the session to close'), so the description adds no additional parameter detail. Schema coverage is 100%, 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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Close a persistent SSH session and release the connection'), clearly stating what the tool does. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ssh_session_open and ssh_execute by focusing on the close operation.

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 explicitly instructs 'Always call when done working with a session' and explains the consequences of not closing (connection remains until cert expiry or timeout), providing strong contextual guidance. It does not offer explicit exclusions or compare with alternatives, but the use case is clear.

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