gsa_close

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and falls short. It does not disclose whether unsaved changes are discarded, whether a save prompt occurs, whether the operation is reversible, or what state the session is left in — all critical for a state-destroying operation.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with zero waste. Nothing superfluous is present and the core action is stated immediately.

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?

The output schema covers return values, so the description needn't explain them. However, for a no-arg operation that tears down the active model, the omission of unsaved-change behavior leaves a meaningful gap an agent should know about.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify. The schema is trivially complete and no parameter documentation is required.

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?

States a specific verb ('Close') and resource ('current GSA model'), so an agent knows this terminates the active model session. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like gsa_new_file, gsa_delete, or gsa_save, so an agent must infer that closing is distinct from deleting or discarding.

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 on when to use this versus gsa_save, gsa_new_file, or gsa_delete, and no mention of prerequisites such as having a model open. The agent gets no routing or exclusion information.

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