browser_close

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions a mutation boundary but does not explain what that entails (e.g., permissions, side effects, reversibility). The agent cannot assess safety or impact.

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 a single concise sentence. However, it sacrifices clarity for brevity. Every word should earn its place, but jargon like 'governed mutation boundary' adds little.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (single required param, no output schema), the description should clarify return behavior, error conditions, and prerequisites. It fails to do so, leaving the agent guessing about success signals.

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 0% and there is only one parameter (collaboration_id) with a regex pattern. The description adds no meaning to this parameter—it does not explain what a collaboration_id is, how to obtain it, or why it is needed for closure.

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 exact explicitly shared tab through a governed mutation boundary.' The verb 'Close' and resource 'tab' are clear. It distinguishes from siblings like browser_open, but the meaning of 'governed mutation boundary' is somewhat vague.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like browser_navigate, browser_focus, or closing via dialogs. The 'exactly explicitly shared' phrasing is confusing and doesn't help an agent decide contextually.

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