session_browser_close

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the operation is conditional on the browser being open and conveys the persistent, session-authentication context. However, it does not explain consequences such as loss of the authenticated session or how this differs from clearing tokens or using session_clear.

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 concise: three short sentences plus a returns line, with the primary action front-loaded. Every clause adds scope, usage context, or return information without redundancy or filler.

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 zero-parameter close tool with an output schema, the description covers the main action, the open/closed condition, and the manual-use trigger. A minor gap is the lack of explicit guidance on choosing between this and the sibling browser_close tool, but overall it is adequate.

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 schema coverage is 100% (vacuously), so there is nothing the description needs to explain about parameters. The baseline 4 applies because no parameter semantics are 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 opens with a specific action and resource: closing the persistent Chromium browser, and adds the idempotent condition 'if it's open.' It clearly communicates what the tool does, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling browser_close tool beyond using the word 'persistent.'

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 description states when to use the tool: manually close the browser after document operations requiring session authentication, and gives the condition 'Only needed when browser persistence is enabled.' It provides clear usage context, but does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, such as the relationship to browser_close.

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