Close SSH Tunnel

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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, and open-world hints. The description adds 'closes' which is consistent with mutation, but doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide.

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 four-word sentence with no redundant information. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity, though slightly too minimal.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one required parameter, no nested objects, and an existing output schema), the description is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly. However, it could mention that the tunnelId comes from tunnel_list.

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 has 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'tunnelId'. The description does not add any extra meaning or context beyond 'Tunnel identifier', so it provides no added value.

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 'Closes an active tunnel' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the tool's purpose. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'tunnel_list' and 'tunnel_local_forward', but doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'ssh_close_session'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like 'ssh_close_session' close SSH sessions, not tunnels, but the description doesn't clarify this distinction or mention prerequisites like needing a valid tunnel ID.

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