ezd_api3_close_case

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 states that a case is closed but does not mention irreversibility, permission requirements, side effects on related documents, or any audit/blockchain implications. Minimal transparency beyond the bare operation.

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?

A single concise sentence with the action front-loaded and the required inputs listed. No filler, no redundancy, and appropriately sized for the operation.

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?

Despite high schema coverage, the tool has no annotations and no output schema. The description lacks behavioral context (side effects, reversibility), usage boundaries versus sibling tools, and any indication of the response format. For an agent choosing among many close/update/delete siblings, this is incomplete.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description repeats that IdPracownika, IdKoszulki, and optional Uwagi are needed, but adds no extra semantic meaning such as formats, constraints, or relationships. It also omits the optional CID parameter.

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 uses a specific verb ('Zakoncz' = close/finish) and a clear resource ('sprawe' = case) in the EZD PUW system, making the action unambiguous. It does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like ezd_koszulka_close, but the name and action are clear enough.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ezd_koszulka_close or ezd_api3_update_case. It only lists required inputs without stating conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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