close_window

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

The annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds concrete behavioral context: force defaults to true and discards unsaved changes, which warns the agent about the destructive default beyond what the annotations state.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the action and packs the force semantics into a parenthetical. Every word 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 close operation, the description plus annotations cover the safety-critical behavior and the default. It does not state what force=false does or where id comes from, but these are minor gaps given the simple schema and absence of nested/output schemas.

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 schema has zero descriptions for the two parameters, so the description must compensate. It usefully explains force (discard unsaved changes, default true), but it does not explain id, which is required.

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 and direct object ('Close an image window'), and the parenthetical clarifies the force parameter. It is clearly distinguished from sibling operations like open_image, duplicate_window, and list_windows even without naming them.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternative routing is provided; the tool does not mention list_windows for obtaining an id or saving before closing. The use case is strongly implied by the operation name, so an agent can infer it, but there is no stated guidance.

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