remote_port_stop_all

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. The description accurately states the destructive scope ('stop all') and the flexibility of 'session or all sessions', but it does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether existing connections are terminated, if the action is reversible) or any permission requirements.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the action, succinctly covering the tool's purpose and scope. No filler or redundancy.

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 parameter and no output schema, the description provides the essential context: what it does and the two usage modes (specific session or all). It does not explain return values or side effects, but given the low complexity, the description is adequate.

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 coverage is 100% with the sessionId parameter already described as 'Session ID, or 'all' to stop all forwards'. The tool description essentially restates this, adding no new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 specifies the exact action ('Stop'), the resource ('all port forwards'), and the scope ('for a session or all sessions'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like remote_port_stop, which likely stops a single forward.

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 clearly states the tool's scope and the 'all sessions' option, implying when it is appropriate to use. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like remote_port_stop for single-forward scenarios, so it falls short of full explicit when/when-not guidance.

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