charlotte_tab_close

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does so by noting the automatic tab switch if the closed tab was active. However, it omits details about error handling (e.g., invalid tab ID) or whether the tab is permanently removed.

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 extremely concise—two sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the behavioral note is efficiently appended.

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?

The description covers the main action and a key behavioral consequence (tab switching). Given the simplicity of the tool and the absence of an output schema, the description is nearly complete, though it could briefly note the return value or error state.

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 input schema provides a description for the single parameter (tab_id) with 100% coverage. The description adds no further semantic value beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 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 a browser tab by its ID, which is specific and unambiguous. It also distinguishes this from sibling tools like charlotte_tab_open (open a new tab) and charlotte_tab_switch (switch between tabs) by focusing solely on closing.

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?

The description provides clear context: use this tool when you need to close a specific tab. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the action is sufficiently distinct from sibling tools that the intended usage is clear.

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