Close Session

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

The destructiveHint annotation already flags the tool as destructive. The description adds 'clean up resources,' which gives some context about side effects, but it does not specify what resources are cleaned up (e.g., cookies, cache, local state) or whether the action is reversible. With the annotation covering the destructive nature, the added context is minimal but not contradictory.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word carries meaning, with no filler or redundant information.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no nested objects, output schema present, and a clear destructive annotation), the description is fully complete. It tells the agent what the tool does and the annotation covers the safety profile, leaving no critical gaps.

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, so the description does not need to explain parameter meanings. Per the rubric, a baseline of 4 is appropriate when no parameters are present, and the description adds nothing necessary beyond what the empty schema already conveys.

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 current browser session') and the resource affected ('browser session'), with a specific verb and resource. It is unambiguous and distinguishes itself from all sibling tools, which are all read/social operations and none involve session management.

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 implies usage—you would call this when you are done with the browser session—but it does not explicitly state when to use it or mention alternatives. No exclusion or conditional guidance is provided, so the usage context is implied rather than explicit.

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