session_close

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explicitly discloses the escalation strategy (sends EOF, then SIGHUP, then SIGKILL), which goes beyond a simple 'terminate' and informs the agent about potential forceful behavior. This is valuable context for an AI agent.

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 extremely concise—two sentences, no filler. Every word serves a purpose, and the critical behavioral detail is front-loaded. It achieves maximum clarity with minimal text.

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 tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers the core behavior. A minor gap is the lack of information about the return value or error states, but given the tool's simplicity, it is substantially complete.

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 coverage is 100%; the schema already describes the only parameter ('Session ID to close'). The description adds no additional meaning or usage constraints for this parameter, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Terminate') and the resource ('a session'). The details on the termination sequence (EOF, SIGHUP, SIGKILL) differentiate it from sibling tools like session_resize, session_list, etc., making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., session_interact, session_exec). There is no mention of prerequisites or conditions under which closing is appropriate. The description only states what it does, not when to choose it.

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