Close tab

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and discloses almost nothing: it does not say whether the slot is released, whether the last remaining tab can be closed, what happens if the tab id is invalid, or whether the user's page state is destroyed. "Closes" implies mutation but no consequences are described.

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 sentences with the action front-loaded and no padding. The second sentence is redundant with the schema's required list, which is the only minor waste.

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?

A destructive 3-parameter tool with no annotations, no output schema, and a one-line description is under-specified. An agent gets no signal about what state is affected after a close or how the slot parameter interacts with it.

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%, so the schema already documents tab, slot, and agent in detail (including slot/port normalization). The description adds nothing beyond restating that tab is required, which is already in the schema's required list, so baseline 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?

"Closes a tab" gives a specific verb and resource, so the agent knows the operation. It does not, however, distinguish this from the sibling browser_close (close the browser) or browser_tab_select, leaving the tab-vs-browser scope to inference.

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 offers no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and names no alternative among the many tab/session siblings. "tab is required" is a parameter restatement, not usage context.

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