ssh_shell_close

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states that the session is closed and the connection released, but does not describe consequences like subsequent reads/writes failing, idempotency, or cleanup of associated resources. This is minimal and lacks important behavioral context for a mutation-like operation.

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 a single concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any fluff or redundancy. Every word contributes to the meaning, making it highly efficient.

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 close operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but misses key contextual details. It does not specify when to close, what happens if the session does not exist, or the post-conditions of closure. Given the lack of annotations, a slightly richer description would be more complete.

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 input schema has 100% coverage, providing a clear description for session_id as 'The session ID returned by ssh_shell_open.' The tool description does not add further parameter meaning, but since the schema already fully documents the parameter, 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 action: 'Close an SSH shell session and release the connection.' It uses a specific verb ('close') and resource ('SSH shell session'), and the 'SSH' qualifier distinguishes it from sibling close tools for serial, power, and adb shells.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it should be used after an SSH session is no longer needed, nor does it contrast with other close tools. The usage context is only implied by the name and sibling set.

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