disconnect_wifi

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

Annotations already state readOnlyHint=false, so the write nature is known. The description adds that the operation targets the current network, but it does not disclose side effects such as whether the WiFi adapter remains on, whether the network profile is forgotten, or whether a no-op error occurs. This is a small gap given annotations cover the overall safety profile.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words and the main action appears first. It is appropriately terse for a parameterless operation.

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 zero-parameter tool, the description is minimally viable, but it lacks context about success output, already-disconnected behavior, and the distinction from toggle_wifi. Since there is no output schema to describe return values, the description would need to carry that information; it does not.

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?

There are zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to add semantically. The baseline of 4 for parameterless tools applies because the tool is correctly callable without further field explanations.

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 direct verb and a specific resource: disconnecting from the current WiFi network. It is distinct from siblings like connect_wifi and toggle_wifi, although it does not explicitly name those alternatives. The phrase 'current WiFi network' narrows the scope sufficiently.

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 is provided about when to choose disconnect_wifi over connect_wifi, toggle_wifi, or list_wifi_networks. The description does not state that it leaves the WiFi radio enabled or what happens if already disconnected. Agents must infer usage from the name alone.

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