close_image

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavior. It discloses a key behavior (dirty images require discard=true), which is useful. However, it does not mention side effects, error behaviors (e.g., what happens if an image is dirty and discard is false), or whether the operation is destructive. The disclosure is partial but adds value.

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. It immediately states the action, then adds the necessary condition. No wasted words; it earns its place.

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 simple two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the core behavior (close and discard condition). However, it omits handling of non-dirty images, error cases, and does not explicitly reference the image_id parameter. The tool is low complexity, but the description could be more 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 input schema has no descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must explain parameters. It explains 'discard' in the context of dirty images, adding meaningful semantics. 'image_id' is not mentioned but is self-explanatory from its name and context. The description partially compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 an image') with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (e.g., list_open_images, get_active_image) by focusing solely on the close operation. The additional detail about discard makes the purpose unambiguous.

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 a conditional usage hint: dirty images need discard=true. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions. It is implied that closing is for dismissing an image, but no direct comparison to other operations is given.

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