session.close

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'close' — not whether closing is synchronous vs. asynchronous, whether it triggers side effects (e.g., saving state, releasing locks), or what happens to resources tied to the session. There is no mention of error behavior for nonexistent or already-closed sessions.

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 — only 4 words. This is appropriately short for a simple close operation, but it comes at the cost of behavioral and parameter details. No extraneous content exists.

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?

With no output schema and a single parameter that is poorly documented, the description is incomplete. There are many sibling session tools (session.open, session.list, session.mode, session.set_mode, session.open_bytes, session.open_existing) but no context about how this tool interacts with them. A user can guess that session_id comes from session.list or session.open, but the description doesn't confirm this.

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 description coverage is 0%, meaning the description must compensate for the lack of param documentation. The description provides no information about what session_id expects (e.g., format, source — from session.list? a saved value?). The single parameter is completely undocumented beyond its name and type, which is insufficient for a required 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 'Close one open session' which clearly conveys the action (close) and resource (session). It distinguishes itself from session.open (open), session.list (list), and session.mode (get mode) among the siblings. However, it doesn't clarify which session types it closes (e.g., only sessions opened via session.open vs. all session types).

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. Among siblings like session.list, session.open, and session.mode, there is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., session must be open), what happens if session_id is invalid, or when not to call it (e.g., if another operation depends on the session).

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