disconnect_sessions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behavioral trait: sessions remain active but clients are disconnected, and that user applications keep running. This is valuable context beyond the schema. It doesn't mention side effects like whether reconnection is possible or if any cleanup occurs, but the core behavior is well disclosed.

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 with zero waste. The core action is front-loaded, and the critical distinction from logoff_sessions is placed immediately after. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool with a clear action and an explicit sibling distinction, the description is nearly complete. It doesn't describe the return value, but an output schema exists, so that's not required. It could mention whether the operation is reversible or if there are prerequisites, but the essential information for correct invocation is present.

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 documents the session_ids parameter. The description adds the behavioral nuance that the session remains active but the client is disconnected, which reinforces the parameter's meaning. Since coverage is high, a baseline of 3 applies, and the description adds a bit more context, justifying a 4.

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 ('Disconnect one or more user sessions') and the resource (user sessions), and explicitly distinguishes it from the sibling logoff_sessions by noting that sessions remain active while clients are disconnected. This is a specific verb+resource with clear differentiation from siblings.

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 says when to use this tool vs the alternative: 'Use logoff_sessions to fully terminate sessions.' This provides a clear exclusion and routes the agent to the correct sibling when full termination is needed.

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