flipper_disconnect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It discloses the primary behavioral effect (closing the connection and releasing the handle) but does not mention potential side effects, idempotency, or behavior when not connected. This is adequate for a simple tool but lacks depth.

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 action and its effect. No filler or redundant information, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 (no parameters, simple operation), the description is largely complete. It doesn't mention preconditions like 'must be connected', but the presence of an output schema and the straightforward nature of the action make this a minor gap. Overall, sufficient for the tool's complexity.

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 has zero parameters, and the schema has no properties, so the description does not need to explain parameter meaning. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description adds no unnecessary parameter information.

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 specifies the action ('Close the connection') and the resource ('the Flipper'), and it distinguishes itself from siblings like flipper_connect by being the inverse operation. The addition of 'releasing the USB/serial handle' provides clarity on what the disconnect entails.

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 implies usage by being the direct counterpart to flipper_connect, but it does not explicitly state when to use it (e.g., 'after you are done') or when not to use it. No alternative tools are mentioned, though the sibling context makes the usage reasonably inferable.

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