Telnet Console: Disconnect

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable details: the exact idempotent return value `{ connected: false, already: true }` when no session is open, and explicitly warns that closing the socket is a side effect, reinforcing that it is not read-only. This goes beyond the annotations and fully discloses behavior.

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 concise (three sentences), front-loaded with the primary action, and includes essential details like idempotency and side effects without any fluff. 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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: the action, the idempotent behavior with a specific return value, the use cases, and the side-effect warning. The annotations complement it well, and nothing essential is missing.

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% since the only parameter 'device' has a clear description in the schema ('Optional target device (IP or serial). Omit to use the focused tab.'). The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema, 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 clearly states the specific verb 'Close' and the resource 'BrightScript debug console (TCP 8085)', and it explicitly mirrors the Disconnect button. It distinguishes itself from siblings like telnet_connect (opposite operation) and get_telnet_log (reading logs) by specifying the exact scope.

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 provides explicit use cases: 'Use this to release the 8085 socket so another tool can attach, or to stop log accumulation.' It clearly implies when to use it, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it. The context is sufficient for an agent to decide.

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