niri_close_window

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states the basic action but provides no extra context such as side effects, behavior with invalid window IDs, or whether the operation is reversible. For a destructive action like closing a window, more transparency would be expected.

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 sentence with a clear verb-first structure, directly conveying the tool's purpose and parameter behavior. No wasted words.

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 tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential usage. It does not mention edge cases like no focused window or invalid ID, but these are not critical given the schema and overall simplicity.

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 covers only the parameter type/default with 0% description coverage. The description compensates by explaining 'window_id' as a specific window's numeric ID and implies that null/omitted targets the currently focused window, adding meaningful semantic context.

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 uses a specific verb ('Close') and clearly identifies the resource (window), distinguishing between the currently focused window and a specific window by numeric ID. This differentiates it from sibling tools like niri_focus_window or niri_move_window_to_workspace.

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 closing a window) and clarifies two usage modes: the focused window (default) or a specific window via ID. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or mention when not to use it, but the context is clear given the sibling tool names.

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