Close terminal

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

Annotations already carry destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 'release it' resource-lifecycle detail, but does not explain what happens to running processes or output inside the session; still, it does not 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?

The description is a single efficient sentence with the core action front-loaded. It is concise and readable, though it spends no effort on the missing parameter or usage context.

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 one-parameter terminal tool with output schema and strong annotations, this is minimally viable: the agent can infer it should pass a session_id to terminate. However, it lacks explicit guidance on where the session_id comes from and how this differs from terminal_signal/terminal_write, so the context is not fully complete.

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 0% and the description does not explain session_id at all. The agent is left with only the parameter name to infer that it must provide an existing terminal session identifier, so the description adds no meaning beyond the schema.

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 ('Terminate') and resource ('terminal session'), and adds 'release it' to convey resource cleanup. It is clear but does not explicitly distinguish terminal_close from sibling terminal_signal, which might also be used to end a session's activity.

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 guidance is given about when to close a session versus sending a signal, waiting for output, or listing sessions. The description implies 'when done with the session' but provides no explicit context or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer selection among the terminal_* siblings.

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