browser_close

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint and openWorldHint, but the description does not clarify the scope of 'close the page'—whether it closes only the current tab, the entire browser, or whether it is reversible. This ambiguity is a significant gap for a destructive action.

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 only three words, achieving maximum conciseness and immediate clarity. Every word earns its place, and the structure is perfectly front-loaded.

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 such a simple tool, the description is mostly adequate, but the ambiguity about scope (page vs. browser) and lack of information about side effects or reversibility prevent it from being fully complete. The annotations partially compensate, but the description itself is minimal.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema carries no information. With no parameters to document, the description does not need to add parameter semantics, and the baseline of 4 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb 'close' with a clear resource 'the page', making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. It distinguishes naturally from sibling tools like browser_navigate or browser_click by describing a distinct action.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, it does not mention that navigating to another page might be preferable to closing the current page, nor any prerequisites or exclusions.

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