close_session

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It clearly states the core effect (ends the session) and the key behavioral trait (automatic reconnection on a later call), which reassures agents that the action is not permanently destructive. It could mention whether session-scoped data (e.g., console captures, network timings) is reset, but for a simple close operation this coverage is adequate.

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, each earning its place. The first states the primary action; the second adds a critical behavioral fact (reconnection). No filler or redundancy.

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 is simple: no parameters, an existing output schema (so return values need not be described), and the description covers the only two relevant facts (what it does and the reconnection behavior). It is fully complete for its scope.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the input schema is empty (100% schema coverage is trivially satisfied). The description correctly provides no parameter details. Baseline for zero parameters is 4, as there is nothing to explain.

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 ('End') and identifies the resource ('automation session on the phone'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like session_info (which reports info). The action is 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 statement 'A later call reconnects automatically' implies this is a non-destructive, reversible action and positions it as safe to invoke before subsequent operations. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, when not to use it, or whether to close the session at the end of a task.

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