mimicus_end_discovery

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

Annotations already declare the full safety profile (readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=false, openWorld=true). The description adds real value by disclosing the cascade: both the operation and its candidates/cursors are released, not just the operation handle. It omits whether the released candidates are recoverable and what happens on a second call, which the non-idempotent hint makes relevant.

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 no filler; the scope of the release ('and its candidates/cursors') is stated compactly. It is arguably too terse for a non-idempotent teardown tool, but nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover safety. What remains missing for a lifecycle/cleanup tool is the prerequisite state ('selected' operation), the relationship to mimicus_close_session, and what happens post-release. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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?

One required parameter at 0% schema description coverage, so the description must carry the burden. 'The selected temporary discovery operation' weakly implies operationId comes from a prior selection step, but gives no format, source, or constraint guidance (the schema's 1-100 length bounds are undocumented anywhere).

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Release the selected temporary discovery operation' plus its 'candidates/cursors', which an agent can map to the mimic discovery lifecycle. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling mimicus_close_session, leaving ambiguity about which teardown tool applies to which resource.

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 when-to-use, no preconditions (an operation must already be open/selected), and no mention of the obvious alternative, mimicus_close_session. The word 'selected' implies prior state but the agent is given no guidance on when ending discovery is appropriate versus closing a session.

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