hexvero_closeRelease an opened target and clear its retained analysis from the review session. Provide the targetId returned when the target was opened.
Release a target and its retained analysis.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| targetId | Yes | Target id returned by hexvero_open |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already disclose non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds that the target and its retained analysis are released, which is useful scope, but "release" remains vague about whether analysis is discarded or merely freed from memory.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It tells the agent the essential effect immediately.
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 close tool with complete schema coverage and rich annotations, the description is nearly sufficient. A small gap remains around the precise meaning of releasing retained analysis, but no crucial calling information is missing.
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 has 100% schema coverage and the schema explains that targetId is returned by hexvero_open. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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 states a specific verb ("Release") and resource ("a target and its retained analysis"), so the action is clear. It does not explicitly name the sibling tool or the pairing with hexvero_open, though the schema's targetId description supplies that context.
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?
Usage is implied: close a target after it has been opened and analyzed, releasing its retained analysis. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-tool guidance in the description itself.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.