Close browser

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

The description discloses critical behavioral traits beyond the destructiveHint annotation: it closes every tab, sacrifices all browser state on ephemeral profiles, preserves data on persistent profiles, and automatically relaunches on the next tool call. This is rich, honest behavioral context that fully aligns with and expands upon the annotations.

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 concise and well-structured. Every sentence serves a purpose: the first gives the core action, the second differentiates from close_page and explains the relaunch behavior, and the third covers data persistence and the save_session recommendation. No word is wasted, and the structure facilitates quick scanning.

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 (no parameters), the description is complete. It explains the tool's effect, its side effects on different profiles, when to use it, and the relaunch behavior. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values, and the description covers all necessary contextual aspects.

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 tool has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are inherently satisfied. The description does not need to explain any parameter details, and the schema coverage is 100% by vacuity. A baseline of 4 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific, unambiguous action: 'Quit Chrome entirely, closing every tab.' It clearly identifies the resource (Chrome browser) and the scope (all tabs), and explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling tool close_page, making its unique purpose obvious.

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 explicitly explains when to use this tool over close_page, states that it's the mechanism to apply pending launch flags, and advises saving session data before use on ephemeral profiles. These are clear, actionable usage guidelines with direct alternatives and prerequisites.

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