Close cursor

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

The description claims to 'release its dedicated connection', implying a state change, while annotations mark readOnlyHint=true. This contradicts the annotation's implication of no side effects, warranting a score of 1 per the rules.

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 two sentences, no wasted words, and conveys essential information efficiently.

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?

While an output schema exists, the description lacks guidance on the required parameter 'cursor_id' and does not mention potential errors or prerequisites. For a tool with one required param, this is insufficient.

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 0% and the description does not explain the parameter 'cursor_id' beyond its name. The description adds no meaning to the input schema.

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 ('Close a server-side cursor and release its dedicated connection'), uses specific verb 'close', and distinguishes it from sibling tools like open_cursor and fetch_cursor.

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 notes idempotency and the behavior when cursor is not open, giving guidance on safe reuse. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state prerequisites, though this is straightforward for a cursor lifecycle tool.

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