close_image

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the outcome ('free memory') but does not mention whether closing is irreversible, whether unsaved changes are affected, or any side effects on related views, clones, or masks.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes meaning: the action, the target resource, and the purpose are all present.

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 one-parameter tool, the description is close to sufficient. However, since there are no annotations and no output schema, a note on how to obtain view_id (e.g., via list_open_images) or the irreversible nature of closing would improve completeness.

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 fully documents view_id with 'View ID to close', so the parameter meaning is already clear. The description adds a slight mapping between 'image window' and view_id, but no extra format, source, or usage nuance beyond the schema.

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 ('Close'), a clear resource ('image window'), and a rationale ('to free memory'). It is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like close_mask and open_image.

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 when to use the tool: when an image window should be closed to release memory. However, it provides no explicit guidance about alternatives, such as using close_mask for masks, or what not to use this tool for.

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