catia_close_document

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the description is not contradicting them, but it adds no behavioral context of its own. The critical fact for a destructive close — that unsaved changes are discarded unless save=true is passed — is never stated.

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 short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity comes at the cost of the safety information an agent actually needs.

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 destructive, non-idempotent tool with no output schema, the description omits the one thing that matters: unsaved work is lost when save is left at its false default. That omission makes it incomplete for safe invocation.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single 'save' parameter is documented in the schema with its default, so the schema carries the semantics. The description adds nothing beyond it, which is the baseline 3 for a fully covered schema.

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) and a specific resource (the active CATIA document), which implicitly separates it from catia_close_all, catia_close_sketch and catia_drawing_close. It stops short of naming any alternative explicitly, so it is clear but not sibling-differentiating.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. An agent cannot tell from this sentence whether it should prefer catia_close_all, catia_save_document + close, or catia_disconnect, nor what happens to a document with unsaved edits.

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