frx_env_closeClose a specified environment process by its ID to stop background tasks and free system resources. Terminates the target process directly, enabling controlled cleanup of environment instances.
关闭指定环境进程。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It merely states the action 'close' without explaining what the operation entails (e.g., abrupt termination vs graceful shutdown, reversibility, side effects on other environments).
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, short sentence that conveys the core purpose without verbosity. However, it could be expanded slightly to add necessary context without losing conciseness.
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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the 'id' parameter refers to, what a successful close looks like, or any error conditions. Essential operational context is missing.
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 schema defines one required parameter 'id' with no description. The tool description does not clarify what 'id' represents (e.g., environment ID, process ID), leaving the AI agent to infer its meaning. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate for this gap.
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 'Close the specified environment process' clearly states the verb (close) and resource (environment process). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like frx_env_delete, leaving ambiguity about whether 'close' terminates the process or deletes the environment entirely.
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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as frx_env_delete or frx_env_stop. There are no conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions mentioned, leaving the AI agent without context for appropriate invocation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.