Close Tab

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds behavioral context by specifying that it closes a tab without closing the browser. This goes beyond what annotations provide, though it does not detail side effects like tab state loss.

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 sentence of 15 words, front-loaded with the action and resource. It is concise, contains no redundant information, and every word adds value.

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 destructive tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior: what it does, how to specify the target, and what it does not do. It could mention return values or error conditions, but these are likely handled by the output schema.

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 single parameter tab_id is already well-described in the schema (MCP tab id or DrissionPage native id). The description repeats 'by id from tab_list' but does not add new meaning or constraints beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3.

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 clearly states the action (close), the resource (browser tab), and distinguishes it from closing the whole browser. It also specifies how to identify the tab (by id from tab_list). This provides a specific and unambiguous purpose.

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 provides context on when to use this tool by noting it does not close the whole browser, implying it's for closing individual tabs. However, it does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, such as when to use page_close instead.

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