close_headless_desktop

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

The description adds context beyond the destructiveHint annotation by explaining that the desktop is fully freed only after all processes exit, and it describes the return JSON with a 'closed' boolean indicating actual closure. This is useful operational insight.

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 concise and well-structured, leading with the main action, followed by a relevant note and then an Args/Returns block. No wasted words.

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 simple cleanup tool, the description covers the key behavior, the prerequisite, and the return format. It is sufficient for an agent to use it correctly, though it could mention the default value or idempotency, but those are in schema/annotations.

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 already defines a 'name' property with a description, but the tool description does not add meaning beyond labeling it 'desktop name'. The parameter is a nested object, and the description's phrasing 'params (HeadlessDesktopInput): desktop name' could mislead the agent to pass a string directly, given the schema requires an object.

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 states it releases the server's handle to an off-screen desktop, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_headless_desktop and list_headless_desktops by focusing on closing/releasing.

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 a prerequisite (closing apps first) and explains the freeing behavior, implying it should be used when done with a desktop. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives like stop_virtual_display or wsl_destroy, so it doesn't fully distinguish when to choose this tool.

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