Close the tabs to the right

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false; the description adds the non-obvious behavioral detail that trailing pinned tabs are preserved, matching the menu. It does not say whether closed tabs land in the recently-closed list or are otherwise recoverable, which for a bulk-close mutation would be valuable.

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 with zero waste, the scope front-loaded and the exception second. Nothing is repeated and nothing is padded.

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?

Covers scope, boundary default, and the pinned-tab exception with no output schema to explain. The one meaningful gap is recoverability of the closed tabs, which an agent deciding to call a bulk-close operation would want to know.

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 100% and the single optional `context` parameter already documents the left-boundary semantics and its default. The description's 'the given one' merely agrees with the schema rather than adding format or selection guidance, so baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('Close every tab to the right of the given one') and anchors it to a known UI affordance in the tab context menu. This cleanly separates it from siblings like browser_close_tab, browser_close_other_tabs, and browser_close_tabs_by_url without needing to open their schemas.

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 parenthetical naming the context-menu equivalent implies the use case, and the boundary semantics are clear. However, it never explicitly contrasts itself with the nearest alternatives (browser_close_tab, browser_close_other_tabs, browser_close_tabs_by_url), leaving the routing decision to inference.

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