reconnect_last

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It transparently explains that connections are remembered across sessions, that no name reopens the most recent, and that it advises using 'connect' when no remembered connection exists. It does not cover edge cases like port unavailability, but the core behavior is well disclosed.

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, with the main purpose front-loaded. Every sentence adds value: the core action, the memory feature, the optional name behavior, the typical use case, and the fallback. No redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no annotations, the description fully covers when to use it, what it does, and how it behaves in edge cases. The output schema is present, so return values are presumably documented elsewhere. Nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

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 single parameter 'name' is fully explained: with no name, it reopens the most recent connection. This goes beyond the schema's default value and gives the agent clear meaning for the parameter, compensating for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 tool reconnects to a remembered port with the same settings, using a specific verb ('reconnect') and resource ('remembered port'). It also differentiates from sibling 'connect' by explaining the fallback when nothing is remembered, making its purpose distinct.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: it is handy at the start of a chat to avoid repeating port and baud settings, and if nothing is remembered, it directs the user to use 'connect' instead. This clearly states when to use this tool versus the alternative.

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