end_context

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It clearly discloses the main side effects: releasing file locks, logging session end, and clearing context. It could mention edge cases like errors or idempotency, but the listed effects are sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's impact.

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 well-structured with clear sections and front-loaded purpose. However, some redundancy exists—'End your current work context and session' and 'Clear your current context' repeat similar ideas, and the workflow repeats information from the best practice section.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description fully covers when to use the tool, what it does, its side effects, and the recommended workflow. For a single-parameter session-close tool, this is complete and actionable.

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 provides 100% coverage for the single required parameter (agent_id) with a clear description. The tool description does not add additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'End your current work context and session.' It clearly distinguishes this from related session tools like start_context and switch_context by framing it as the terminal workflow step.

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 'WHEN TO USE' section lists explicit scenarios, and the 'WORKFLOW' section gives a clear ordered sequence: log_change(), unlock_files(), then end_context(). This is excellent guidance on when and how to use the tool versus alternatives.

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