bc_close_page

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that pageContextId becomes invalid, that it's safe after errors, and that it frees server resources. Could mention idempotency but still strong.

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?

Description is three paragraphs and front-loaded with key action. Every sentence adds value, though slightly verbose. Could be tightened without losing content.

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 simple close tool with one parameter and no output schema or annotations, the description is comprehensive. Covers purpose, usage, behavioral implications, and error handling.

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 coverage is 100% and schema already describes pageContextId. Description adds that it requires context from bc_open_page and becomes invalid, but this is marginal. Baseline 3 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 clearly states 'Closes an open Business Central page and frees its server-side resources', providing a specific verb (close) and resource (page). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like bc_open_page, bc_read_data, etc.

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?

Explicitly says 'Always call this when you are finished working with a page' and warns 'Do NOT call this in the middle of a multi-step workflow'. It also provides alternatives: 'use bc_read_data to refresh data instead' for resetting.

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