close_document

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says it closes an open document and returns 'Confirmation with status.' It does not disclose whether unsaved changes are discarded, whether a prompt may appear, what happens with an invalid doc_id, or any side effects of closing.

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 very concise, front-loads the core action, and includes only necessary sections for arguments and return value. Every sentence contributes useful information 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 one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential invocation details: the action, the argument source, and a basic return description. However, the lack of annotations and the absence of any mention of save/discard behavior leave some risk for an agent invoking this state-changing operation without knowing its full impact.

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 provides only the name and type of doc_id, so the description adds meaningful context by specifying that it is 'Document ID from open_document.' This tells an agent exactly where to obtain the value, which is sufficient guidance for the single parameter.

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 and resource: 'Close an open document.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like open_document and save_document by focusing on the closing action and the precondition that the document is already open.

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 the primary usage context: the document must already be open, and the doc_id should come from open_document. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over alternatives like save_document, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites beyond having opened the document.

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