close_session

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core action ('close') and the effect ('disconnect from NSTBrowser'), but it does not detail side effects, irreversibility, potential errors, or whether the operation is idempotent. This is acceptable for a simple close/teardown operation but leaves some behavioral aspects implicit.

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, well-structured sentence that fully covers the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It earns its place and is immediately understandable.

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 low-complexity tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides sufficient information: it states what is closed and what disconnect occurs. Its sibling context clarifies when it would be used. Minor gap: it does not mention return values or error cases, but these are less critical for a close operation.

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 100% with the 'sessionId' parameter already described as 'Session ID to close'. The description adds no additional meaning or context beyond the schema, so it does not improve on the baseline. It correctly maps to the single parameter but provides no extra semantic value.

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 ('Close') and clearly identifies the resource ('a browser session') plus the additional effect ('disconnect from NSTBrowser'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_session, list_sessions, and switch_session, making its purpose 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 usage context is implied by the verb and resource, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any preconditions (e.g., session must exist) or exclusion cases. It is adequate but lacks explicit guidance.

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