browser_close_page

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It conveys the basic close action but omits important consequences for a destructive tool: what happens on an invalid pageId, whether the last page closes the browser, and whether the action is reversible or loses unsaved state.

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 states the action first and then the optional behavior, packing all necessary information into minimal space.

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, no-output-schema tool this is nearly sufficient for correct invocation. The main gap is the lack of error/return behavior, which matters more because there are no annotations or output schema to supplement the description.

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 schema only provides type string, so the description's explanation of pageId and the active-page fallback adds the key semantic meaning. It could further clarify where a valid pageId comes from, but the essential behavior of the only parameter is well covered.

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 concrete action ('Close'), a specific resource ('page/tab'), and the targeting rule ('by pageId, or the active page if omitted'). It is clearly distinct from siblings such as browser_close and browser_switch_page.

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?

It explains the parameter-dependent behavior (pageId vs active page), so the agent knows when to rely on the default. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like browser_close, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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