close_engagement

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

Without annotations, the description reveals that closing an engagement cancels running attacks, but it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as destructiveness, authorization requirements, or irreversibility.

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 sentence that efficiently conveys the purpose and a key side effect with no redundant information.

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 the tool's simplicity and existence of an output schema, the description is minimally adequate but lacks detail on post-close behavior or return values.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning to the single parameter beyond its name. It does not specify the format or source of engagement_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 clearly states the action ('Close an engagement') and the key side effect ('cancelling any attacks still running'), distinguishing it from siblings like create_engagement or cancel_attack.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like cancel_attack or other engagement-related tools. The description lacks explicit context for decision-making.

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