chrome_close_tab

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that, such as irreversibility, what happens to the active tab, or permission requirements. It merely restates the action.

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?

'Close a tab.' is extremely concise with no wasted words, but it is under-specified for a destructive tool. It front-loads the action but omits any caveat or scoping detail that would help an agent use it safely.

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 simple one-parameter tool with rich annotations, the definition is minimally functional. However, it lacks any mention of the default active-tab behavior or how it relates to sibling close tools, leaving the agent to rely entirely on the schema and annotations.

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% and the schema documents tabId with a default value. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb 'Close' and resource 'tab', making the action clear. However, it provides no differentiation from sibling tools such as browser_close or chrome_switch_tab, so an agent cannot easily distinguish this tool's scope without opening the schema.

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 when-to-use guidance, no alternatives, and no prerequisites are given. The agent must infer appropriate usage entirely from the tool name and context.

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