Close persistent SSH session

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds valuable behavioral details: it cleans a private temporary directory and invalidates the id. This surpasses what annotations alone convey, while remaining consistent with them. There is no contradiction.

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 brief, two sentences, with the primary action stated upfront. Every sentence adds value: the first defines the behavior, the second gives a practical use case. No filler or redundant content.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema) and the annotations covering safety profile, the description covers the essential aspects: what is closed, what is cleaned, and when to reopen. The sibling context is clear from the name itself. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 has one required parameter 'id' with a pattern, but no description. The description indirectly clarifies its meaning by stating it "invalidate[s] the id," confirming that id refers to the session identifier. While it could explicitly say 'the id returned by ssh_open', the context and pattern make the parameter's purpose clear enough.

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's core function: "Close the remote shell and SSH connection." It also adds specific cleanup actions (clean private temporary directory, invalidate the id), which distinguishes it from the sibling tools like ssh_open and ssh_interrupt. The verb 'close' is specific and unambiguous.

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 a usage pattern: "Close a dirty session and call ssh_open for a clean environment." This implies when the tool is appropriate (for dirty sessions) and suggests a follow-up action. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like ssh_interrupt or state when not to use it, missing the full '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.