flow_browser_close

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that session data is preserved for the next launch, which is meaningful behavioral context. However, it says nothing about whether in-flight automation tasks are terminated, whether it errors when no session exists, or whether repeated calls are safe.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the key side effect. Every sentence earns its place and nothing is 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 zero-parameter close operation with no output schema, this covers the core action and the data-retention behavior. It is still missing edge-case behavior that the description must carry in the absence of annotations, such as no-active-session handling or effect on running automation.

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 there is no parameter semantics to explain and nothing the description could meaningfully add. Baseline 4 applies, with nothing done wrong.

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 (browser automation session), clearly enough to tell it apart from siblings like flow_browser_check_session or flow_browser_login. It does not explicitly name or contrast those siblings, which keeps it below a 5.

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 implied: close the session when automation is finished, with data retained for the next launch. There is no explicit guidance on when not to call it or which sibling to use instead, and no mention of what happens if no session is active.

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