close

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds that the port is released, a real side effect not visible in annotations, but says nothing about whether session data persists, whether closing an already-closed session errors, or what the result looks like.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, with the side effect following. Nothing is wasted.

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 minimal one-parameter tool with no output schema this is close to adequate, but it omits the error/edge behavior (double close, invalid id) and any indication of what the caller should do after closing, leaving gaps for an agent sequencing sessions.

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 0% and the single session_id parameter has no schema documentation. The description implicitly identifies which session is affected ('a session'), which is self-evident for a one-parameter close tool, but adds no format, source, or validity details.

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 (session) plus the side effect of releasing the port. It is clearly the counterpart to the 'open' sibling, but it never names or contrasts with that sibling explicitly.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as leaving a session open or reusing it. Usage is only implied by the word 'close'.

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