ddb_close_browser

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

The description adds context beyond annotations: it notes the tool only acts 'if one is open' (reinforcing idempotentHint=true) and specifies 'background browser window' to distinguish from any primary window. It doesn't contradict the annotations.

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 short sentences: the first states the action, the second gives usage context. There is no wasted wording, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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?

The tool has no parameters, no output schema, and a simple side-effect. The description fully covers what it does and when to use it, making it complete for an agent to decide invocation.

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?

With zero parameters, the schema is trivially covered (100%) and the description does not need to explain parameters. The baseline for a parameter-less tool is 4, and the description provides no confusing parameter info.

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') and the resource ('background browser window'), and includes a condition ('if one is open'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ddb_navigate or ddb_interact, which are about performing actions rather than cleanup.

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?

It explicitly says the tool is useful after ddb_navigate, ddb_interact, or ddb_get_page, giving clear contextual usage. It doesn't mention when not to use it, but the tool's specific cleanup role is unique enough that no alternative is relevant.

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