zemax_close_fileClose the current optical system in Zemax OpticStudio while keeping the application connection active; optionally save changes first to prevent data loss.
Close the current optical system while retaining the application connection.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| save | Yes | Save the current system if needed before closing |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It usefully states that the application connection is retained, which is a meaningful side-effect distinction. However, it omits other consequential behavior such as whether unsaved changes are discarded when save is false and whether the closing action is reversible.
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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The scoping detail about retaining the connection is included efficiently in the same sentence.
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?
For a simple one-parameter close operation with no output schema, the description covers the core action and the key connection-retention behavior. It is nearly complete, though slightly more context on usage alternatives or unsaved-change behavior would make it fully self-contained.
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 100%, so the single 'save' parameter is already documented in the schema. The description does not add any syntax, default, or side-effect details about the parameter, which is the expected baseline when the schema already covers it.
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 gives a specific verb-resource pair: 'Close the current optical system.' It also distinguishes the action from disconnecting by stating the application connection is retained, which separates it from sibling tools such as zemax_disconnect and zemax_new_system.
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 phrase 'while retaining the application connection' implies the intended context: close the current model without terminating the session. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this over zemax_save_file, zemax_open_file, zemax_new_system, or zemax_disconnect, so alternates are left to inference.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.