close_firefox_session

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

The annotations only provide readOnlyHint=false, which is minimal. The description itself discloses important conditional side effects: it may either release a connection and leave Firefox running or close Firefox if the server started it. This adds meaningful behavioral context that annotations do not convey.

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 three sentences, efficiently packed with the core action, conditional behavior, and a usage cue. There is no filler or repetition, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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?

This is a simple 0-parameter tool with no output schema and minimal annotations. The description covers what the tool does, its side effects, and when to invoke it, which is sufficient for an agent to use it correctly without additional context.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for a 0-parameter tool is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on the action rather than on parameters.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Ends the browser session') and then clarifies the two possible outcomes (release connection vs. close Firefox). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like close_page, which operate at the page level, even though the sibling is not named.

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 explicitly states when to call the tool: 'when the browser task is complete and no further browser interaction is expected.' It does not name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the condition is clear and actionable enough to guide an agent.

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