rlm.session.close

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'persist index metadata' implying writes, but does not disclose if the operation is destructive, reversible, or any side effects. Minimal transparency.

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 very short with no wasted words. However, the Args section repeats schema info, slightly reducing efficiency. It is front-loaded with the key action.

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 close operation with one parameter and an existing output schema, the description is adequate but gaps remain: no mention of idempotency, error conditions, or session state expectations. It meets minimum viability but could be more informative.

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 description includes 'Args: session_id: Session ID to close', but the schema already has a title 'Session Id'. This adds little meaning beyond the schema. Schema description coverage is 0%, indicating no additional parameter info in the description proper, though the Args block provides marginal value.

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: 'Mark session complete and persist index metadata.' The verb 'mark' and resource 'session' are specific. This distinguishes it from siblings like rlm.session.create and rlm.session.info.

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. No prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions are mentioned. The description only states what it does, not when to invoke it.

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