browser_close

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose concrete side effects: the session and its tab are destroyed and temporary handoff files are deleted. It also reassures that the shared browser is unaffected, which is genuinely useful context. It omits error/idempotency behavior for an invalid or already-closed session.

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 sentences, no filler, with the destructive action front-loaded and the non-destructive scoping note second.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and for a one-parameter teardown tool the description covers destruction scope and blast radius. Minor gaps remain around failure behavior, but nothing essential to calling it is missing.

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% and the single 'session' parameter is already documented as 'Session ID returned by browser_run'. The description adds no format or constraint details beyond the schema, so the 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 a browser session and its tab', plus the side effect of deleting temporary handoff files. The clause 'The shared browser remains available for other sessions' scopes the operation and implicitly distinguishes it from any global shutdown, though it never names a sibling like browser_tabs or browser_resume.

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?

Usage is implied (close a session you obtained from browser_run once finished) but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative. The statement that the shared browser survives is the closest thing to a routing hint.

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