close_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action without detailing side effects (e.g., whether the file is saved before closing, what happens if the path is invalid, or if any confirmation is needed). This lack of detail limits transparency.

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 conveys all necessary information without redundancy. It is front-loaded with the action and covers both usage modes.

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's simplicity and the absence of annotations or output schema, the description covers the core functionality but omits important contextual details like error handling, whether the file is saved, or the return value. It is minimally adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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%, so the description must add meaning. It mentions 'path' and its effect (closing a specific file or active file), but does not specify path format, valid values, or the meaning of the empty default. This provides moderate added value over the bare 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 tool's action: 'Close a file by path, or close the active file if path is omitted.' It uses a specific verb ('close') and resource ('file'), and distinguishes from siblings like 'open_file' and 'save_file' by indicating the closing behavior.

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 clear context on usage: specify a path to close a specific file, or omit to close the active file. It does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or name alternatives, but the two-mode behavior is sufficient for typical use.

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