chatgpt_close_browser

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It clearly states the core effect—closing the dedicated resident browser—and limits usage to explicit requests. However, it does not disclose potential side effects such as session loss, whether the browser will restart automatically, or impact on ongoing operations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It communicates the action and the usage condition in two short clauses, earning every word.

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?

This is a low-complexity tool with no parameters and no output schema. The description gives enough context for an agent to decide when to call it. It could mention post-conditions or return behavior, but for a simple close action, the current description is largely complete.

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, which warrants the baseline 4. There are no parameter semantics to clarify, and the schema already fully documents the empty parameter set.

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 action ('明确关闭') on a specific resource ('ChatGPT MCP 的专用常驻浏览器'), making the tool's purpose clear. It does not explicitly compare itself with the sibling chatgpt_browser_lifecycle, so it loses the top score for sibling differentiation.

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 gives an explicit invocation condition: only call when the user explicitly requests closing the browser ('仅在用户明确要求关闭时调用'). This is good when-to-use guidance, but it does not mention alternatives or explicitly state what not to use it for, so it falls slightly short of a 5.

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