close_page

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action is to 'close' a page/tab, implying a destructive operation, but doesn't specify consequences (e.g., if the page is removed from memory, if data is lost, or if it requires specific permissions). This leaves significant behavioral gaps for a mutation tool.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action, making it easy to parse quickly, which is ideal for 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 tool performs a mutation (closing a page/tab) with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral effects, error conditions, or return values, which are crucial for safe and effective use in a browser automation context.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with 'pageId' clearly documented as 'The ID of the page to close'. The description doesn't add any extra meaning beyond this, such as how to obtain the pageId or format requirements, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without compensating further.

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 a browser page/tab' clearly states the action (close) and target (browser page/tab), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'select_page' or 'list_pages' that also involve page management, so it doesn't reach the highest clarity level.

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. For example, it doesn't mention prerequisites like needing an open page or how it relates to sibling tools such as 'new_page' or 'navigate_page', leaving the agent to infer usage context independently.

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