Disconnect device

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

Beyond the destructiveHint and idempotentHint annotations, the description explains the security impact (loses VPN protection), that the device remains on the account, and the prerequisites (control-scope token, Portveil-agent device). It also instructs to confirm with the user, which is critical operational guidance not covered by annotations.

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?

Four sentences, each carrying distinct, necessary information: the action, the effect on traffic, persistence of the device, user confirmation, and prerequisites. No redundancy, and the primary action is front-loaded.

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 single-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the action, its consequence, the device's persistence, the need for user confirmation, and authentication prerequisites. Nothing essential for an agent to invoke it correctly 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?

The schema already fully documents the 'device' parameter with type, description of accepted formats (name, partial, ID), case-insensitivity, and reference to list_devices. Schema coverage is 100%, and the tool description does not add parameter-specific details beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Turn off' and the resource 'device's VPN tunnel', and distinguishes it from remove_device by noting 'device stays on the account' and from reconnect_device with 'until it reconnects'. The purpose is unambiguous and well-differentiated.

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 clear context: it is for temporary disconnection (traffic stops until reconnect) and instructs to confirm with the user first, which is important for a destructive action. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the 'stays on the account' note clarifies it is not removal, giving clear guidance without explicit exclusions.

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