wrave_close_tab

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It clearly identifies the destructive action (closing a tab), but does not mention side effects such as loss of page state, focus shifting to another tab, or behavior when closing the last tab. It is minimally transparent but not richly so.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. It earns its place by naming the action, object, and parameter mechanism.

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?

For a one-parameter action with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential action and input. It does not explain where to obtain tab IDs or what happens after closing, but the tool is simple enough that these are minor gaps.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds only the constraint that the tab must be open, which is a mild clarification beyond the schema's 'ID of the tab to close'; it does not add format, source, or error semantics.

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?

States a specific verb ('Close'), a clear resource ('an open tab'), and the selection mechanism ('by its ID'). This distinguishes it from sibling tab tools such as wrave_focus_tab and wrave_reload_tab, even though no sibling is named.

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 the tool is for closing an existing tab, but gives no explicit guidance about when to prefer it over sibling actions, how to obtain a valid tab_id, or what to do if the tab is already closed. The use case is inferable from the verb but not stated as a decision rule.

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