close_bpmn_modeler

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not say whether closing releases server resources, whether the token becomes invalid, whether the call is idempotent, or what happens on an unknown/expired token.

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 verb and resource, with no waste. Brevity borders on under-specification, but there is no filler.

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 one-parameter cleanup tool with no output schema this is minimally adequate, but with no annotations it should say more about side effects and error behavior. The core information an agent needs to select and invoke it is present.

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% and the single token parameter is documented as coming from open_bpmn_modeler, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds nothing beyond what the schema already provides, which is the baseline 3 case.

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 (live local bpmn-js modeler preview URL), which distinguishes it from sibling open_bpmn_modeler by polarity. Minor muddiness: it says it closes a 'preview URL' while the schema accepts a token, leaving the object being closed slightly ambiguous.

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?

Usage is only implied by the pairing with open_bpmn_modeler (close what you opened). There is no explicit statement of when to call it, whether it is safe to call twice, or what alternative to use if the preview is already gone.

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