gimp_close_image

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, and the description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond them: the tool refuses to close an image with unsaved changes unless discard_changes=True. This is the exact guard behavior an agent needs to avoid data loss. It does not mention permissions or what the response returns, but the safety semantics are well covered.

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?

Two tight sentences, with the core action front-loaded and the safety caveat immediately after. No filler; every clause earns its place.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and the annotations plus the safety note cover the destructive nature of the operation. The only real omission is guidance on the image_id parameter and when to choose this over saving.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden. It explains discard_changes clearly (the flag that bypasses the unsaved-changes guard), but says nothing about image_id, which parameter identifies the target. Partial compensation for the coverage gap.

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?

"Cierra una imagen" states a specific verb (close) and resource (image), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like gimp_open_image and gimp_save_image. It stops short of naming an alternative or contrasting scope, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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 safety condition (fails on unsaved changes unless discard_changes=True) implies the workflow of saving first or explicitly discarding, but the description never states when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as gimp_save_image or gimp_export_image. Usage is implied rather than explicit.

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