ssh_disconnect

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action, omitting any details about side effects (e.g., whether it fails if connection is already closed), authorization requirements, or what happens to associated resources. This is insufficient.

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 extremely concise (5 characters in Chinese), but it sacrifices informativeness for brevity. While it avoids verbosity, it is under-specified for a tool that likely has nuanced behavior. A longer, more informative description would be warranted.

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 simplicity of the tool (one required parameter, no output schema), the description should at least hint at return values (e.g., success/failure indication). It does not. The overall context is incomplete, as the agent receives no information about expected results or error conditions.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% since the single parameter 'connection_id' has a description. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies. No additional context about parameter format or source is provided.

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 '断开SSH连接' translates to 'Disconnect SSH connection', which clearly states the action and resource. However, it is a near-tautology of the tool name and does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'ssh_disconnect_all', which disconnects all connections. This lack of specificity prevents it from being a 4 or 5.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, it does not explain when to use 'ssh_disconnect' instead of 'ssh_disconnect_all', nor does it mention prerequisites or context for safe usage.

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