Close a nested display

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden and does add real value by stating the app and nested compositor are terminated. However, it omits reversibility, whether child windows are destroyed, permissions, and idempotency of an already-closed id — meaningful gaps for a destructive tool.

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?

Two tight sentences with the destructive effect front-loaded and the flag usage second. No wasted words.

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?

No output schema and no annotations, so the description should convey outcome details; it names what is terminated but says nothing about the return value or what happens to still-open windows. Adequate but with clear gaps for a destructive multi-param tool.

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 coverage is 50%: 'id' is well documented in the schema, and the description compensates for the bare 'all' boolean by explaining 'all=true to close every display.' Minor gap is no note on behavior when both id and all are supplied.

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?

Specific verb ('Terminates') and resource ('the app and the nested compositor'), which implicitly distinguishes it from window_close and pairs with display_open. It doesn't explicitly name a sibling, but the effect is clear enough that an agent can tell this closes a whole display session rather than a single window.

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?

'Pass all=true to close every display' gives a conditional usage cue, and 'Optional when exactly one display is open' in the schema hints at the default case. But there's no explicit when-to-use-vs-window_close guidance and no stated exclusions or prerequisites.

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