onda_tab_close

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the important default behavior of closing the active tab when no ID is given. However, it does not mention the destructive/irreversible nature beyond the word 'Close', nor what happens if the ID is invalid or if the tab has unsaved content.

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 immediately states the action and the key conditional behavior. Every word earns its place, with no 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 simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, this description is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly in the common cases. It could be more complete by noting the destructive nature or error behavior, but the core usage context is fully covered.

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 schema already documents the single optional parameter fully with the description 'Tab ID to close. Omit to close active tab.' The tool description essentially mirrors this, adding no new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 ('Close'), names the resource ('a tab'), and specifies identifier-based targeting with a fallback to the active tab. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tab operations like onda_tab_new, onda_tab_list, and onda_tab_focus.

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?

It provides clear context for use: provide an ID to close a specific tab, or omit the ID to close the active tab. However, it does not explicitly mention when NOT to use it or suggest alternatives (e.g., use onda_pane_close for panes), so it stops short of full guidance.

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