ブラウザを閉じる

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states the session is terminated but says nothing about side effects—whether unsaved data is lost, what happens to open pages, auth requirements, or reversibility. For a terminal/close-style action this is a meaningful gap.

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 no filler, so nothing needs trimming. It is appropriately minimal for a zero-parameter action, though equally terse.

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 0-param, no-output-schema tool, the description covers the core purpose. However, the one thing an agent most needs before closing a session—side effects such as lost unsaved state—is absent, leaving it just adequate.

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 the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no parameterization is needed, and there is no schema surface left undocumented.

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?

State a specific verb (終了する = terminate) and resource (JIZURA browser session), so an agent knows exactly what the tool does and can distinguish it from its counterpart jizura_open. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with that sibling, but the action is unambiguous.

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: the agent can infer it should be called when done with the browser session, and that jizura_open is the inverse. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no prerequisites, and no note on whether other session tools must be called first.

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