Abort an unchanged edit session

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

All annotation hints are false, providing only coarse signals. The description adds specific behavioral context beyond the annotations by stating the tool never reverts or deletes files, and that it only closes sessions without pending local edits. It does not disclose idempotency effects or what happens if called with pending edits, but the added detail is meaningful.

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 short, front-loaded sentences clearly convey the action, condition, and safety scope. There is no wasted text or redundant phrasing.

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 single-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is nearly complete: it defines when to call, what the parameter is, and what the tool will not do. A minor gap is not referencing workflow_status to check for pending edits before calling, but the tool remains correctly usable without that.

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 schema already explains that session_id must be an active sessionId from begin_edit_session or workflow_status. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 states the specific action (close a session) and the condition under which it applies (no pending local edits), and explicitly notes it never reverts or deletes files. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like write_report_file or begin_edit_session.

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 gives an explicit invocation condition: only when the session has no pending local edits. It also rules out a common misuse by clarifying the tool is not for reverting or deleting files. It does not name an alternative for discarding edits, but the context is sufficient for an agent to avoid incorrect use.

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