disconnect_database

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 does not say whether disconnecting is idempotent, whether it errors on an unknown alias, what happens to in-flight transactions or result sets, or whether the default connection can be closed.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste, stating verb, resource, and lookup key in order. It is efficiently written, though its brevity is what leaves the behavioral gaps noted above.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional parameter, no output schema, no nesting), and the schema covers the parameter fully, so the description is minimally sufficient. It still omits any error or side-effect behavior for a state-changing connection operation.

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%: the alias parameter and its default of 'default' are fully documented in the schema. The description only restates that the alias identifies the connection, adding no format or behavior detail beyond the schema.

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?

Names a specific verb (disconnect) and resource (database), plus the identifying key (alias). It implicitly contrasts with the sibling connect_database, but never explicitly differentiates itself from list_connections or other connection-management tools.

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?

There is no guidance on when to disconnect, whether it is safe to call while queries are running, or what to do if the alias is unknown. The sibling connect_database is never referenced as the counterpart operation.

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