close_file

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true. The description adds supported file formats but does not disclose what happens to unsaved changes or other side effects of closing. Some additional behavioral context would be beneficial.

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the core purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words, though a bit more structure (e.g., separate lines for usage) could improve readability.

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?

Given no output schema and the destructive nature, the description is minimal. It does not explain return values, side effects, or parameter interactions. For a closing tool, more detail on what happens after closing (e.g., saving) would improve completeness.

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 50%, but the description does not explain any parameter semantics. It does not clarify the roles of clear_all and confirm (which lack schema descriptions), nor does it add meaning beyond the schema for file_path and google_doc_id.

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 uses a specific verb ('close') and resource ('open file session'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like read_file, save, and batch_edit by clearly indicating this is about closing sessions. It also specifies supported file formats.

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 implies usage when an open file session exists and mentions explicit confirmation for closing all sessions, but provides no when-not guidance or alternatives. It lacks details on prerequisites or comparison to other closing scenarios.

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