Close a live browser session and preserve its evidence. Finalizes actions without undo; the session cannot be resumed by replay.
Close the browser session and retain its local evidence. Closing does not undo business effects. A closed session cannot be resumed by replaying its trace.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sessionId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark the operation as destructive and open-world. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond those hints: local evidence is retained, business effects persist, and replaying the trace will not resume the session. This gives the agent a much fuller picture of consequences.
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?
Two tightly scoped sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, followed only by high-value consequences. Every sentence earns its place.
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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, side effects, and irreversibility. It omits details like idempotency or error behavior, but these are not essential given the simplicity and the annotation coverage.
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 never mentions sessionId or how to identify the target session. The schema's property name and UUID format carry the meaning, but the description does nothing to compensate for the missing documentation.
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 and resource: 'Close the browser session.' It adds distinctive constraints—evidence is retained, business effects are not undone, and the trace cannot be replayed—which clearly separates it from sibling tools like jev_open and jev_continue.
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 gives practical context: closing is final and does not reverse side effects, and a closed session cannot be resumed via replay. This implies when not to use the tool, although it does not explicitly name alternative tools such as jev_continue.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.