lsp_shutdown

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only adds 'gracefully.' It does not state that the connection becomes unusable afterward, whether shutdown is idempotent, or that a later lsp_initialize is required to resume work.

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?

One sentence with no filler, and the key verb and resource appear upfront. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple (no parameters) and has an output schema, so the description does not need to document return values. However, it leaves lifecycle context unstated—no mention of shutdown being terminal or how it relates to lsp_initialize/lsp_restart—so a fully self-sufficient agent would need to infer behavior from LSP conventions.

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?

There are zero parameters and the schema properties object is empty, so there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond the schema. The baseline of 4 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb ('shut down') and target ('the scheme-langserver connection'), with 'gracefully' adding manner. It does not explicitly contrast with lsp_restart or lsp_initialize, so the agent must infer lifecycle boundaries largely from the name.

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?

No statement of when shutdown should be used instead of lsp_restart or lsp_initialize, and no warning about prerequisites. The only context is the word 'gracefully,' which implies finality but does not provide explicit selection guidance.

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