browser_close

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

The description only repeats the action 'close', which is already implied by the tool name and annotations (destructiveHint=true). Annotations already convey destructive behavior, and the description adds no extra context about what gets destroyed, whether unsaved data is affected, or if confirmation dialogs appear. No contradictions with annotations.

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 only three words, perfectly concise and front-loaded. Every word is necessary; there is no waste.

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 has no parameters, no output schema, and annotations cover the destructive hint, the description is minimally adequate. However, it does not specify what 'the page' refers to (e.g., current tab? popup?), and whether any side effects occur. For a simple atomic action, this may suffice, but more context would reduce ambiguity.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%. Per the guidelines, 0 parameters gives a baseline of 4. The description does not need to add parameter details since none exist.

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 'Close the page' clearly states the action and resource (close + page). It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like browser_navigate or browser_click, which have different purposes. However, it lacks details about what exactly is closed (current tab vs entire browser), leaving minor ambiguity.

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 (e.g., browser_navigate_back or browser_tabs to switch contexts). There is no mention of prerequisites, side effects, or situations where closing is inappropriate. The agent must infer usage from context.

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