close_managed_tabs

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It richly discloses behaviors: only closes managed tabs, never the browser itself, the default vs allManaged behavior, and the crucial edge case where it avoids closing the last window by only removing from the managed set without calling chrome.tabs.remove. This goes far beyond a basic mutation description.

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?

The description is concise and front-loaded: a single opening sentence states the core purpose, followed by a compact explanation of the two modes and the safety edge case. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Despite having no annotations and no output schema, the description is complete for this tool's complexity. It covers the two parameter behaviors, the safety guarantee, and the critical fallback behavior when closing all managed tabs would empty the last window. There are no significant gaps.

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 the description largely restates what the schema already says (tabId must be managed, allManaged defaults to false, allManaged=true closes all). It does add the context of never closing the browser and the last-window edge case, but those are behavioral rather than parameter-semantic enhancements. 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 the tool closes tabs that BrowserPilot MCP itself opened/used, with a specific verb (close) and resource (managed tabs). It distinguishes from sibling close_page by limiting scope to managed tabs, and explicitly describes the default and allManaged behaviors.

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?

Provides clear context: only closes managed tabs, defaults to the specified tabId, and allManaged=true closes all managed tabs. It also states when not to use it (never closes the Chrome browser itself) and the edge case of the last window being emptied. However, it does not explicitly name an alternative tool like close_page for unmanaged tabs, so it stops short of full when/not-and-alternatives guidance.

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