close_responsive_session

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the mutation nature is covered. The description adds meaningful detail beyond that: exactly what is torn down (paginas, contextos, servidor del panel visual) and what survives (capturas guardadas permanecen en disco), which is precisely the kind of side-effect context an agent needs before calling a cleanup 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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: what is freed, when to call it, and what persists afterward. The core action is front-loaded in the first clause with no preamble or repetition.

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 one-parameter teardown tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, the recommended timing, and the persistence caveat. Only edge behavior (calling with an unknown or already-closed sessionId, and whether a confirmation is returned) is left unspecified.

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?

There is a single sessionId parameter with 100% schema description coverage, and the schema already explains its origin and lifetime ('ID devuelto por open_responsive_session'). The prose adds nothing about the parameter, 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Cierra una comparacion responsive completa') and spells out the concrete effect: it releases the session's pages, contexts and server from the visual panel. It is unambiguously the teardown counterpart to open_responsive_session, and no other sibling in the list closes a session.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance ('Usa esta herramienta al terminar para no acumular navegadores') with a stated rationale. It stops short of naming alternatives or stating what happens if the session is already closed or the id is invalid, so it is clear context rather than full routing guidance.

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