Rocky Disconnect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the effect (session released/terminated), but says nothing about whether the call is idempotent, what happens if no session is active, or whether unsaved state or a still-open project is affected.

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?

A single short sentence with the action front-loaded and no filler. Nothing is wasted, and the meaning lands immediately.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and with zero parameters the surface area is tiny. Still, for a session-terminating operation with no annotations, the description should say whether open projects or unsaved work are affected and whether requiring an active connection can cause an error.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the empty schema is fully self-explanatory. Baseline 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?

The description names a specific verb ('Disconnect') and resource ('Ansys Rocky'), and 'release the session' clarifies the scope. Its counterpart rocky_connect makes the intent unambiguous, though the description doesn't explicitly contrast itself with rocky_close_project, which is the nearest ambiguous sibling.

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?

'release the session' implies this is a teardown/end-of-work call, so usage is inferable. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no statement about whether rocky_close_project or a save must happen first, and no note on how this differs from simply closing the project.

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