Close Terminal Session

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, and the description aligns by saying it terminates and forgets the session. It adds useful context beyond annotations: the exact error message for an already-closed session and the fact that the session is forgotten, not just stopped.

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 compact and front-loaded with the key action, followed by an Args block and an error note. The Args block is somewhat redundant with the schema, but the overall length is appropriate and every element is relevant.

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 single-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, parameter, and failure behavior. It does not describe the success return value, but that is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity and the annotations already signaling destructive behavior.

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 already describes the session parameter as "Session name to close." The description repeats this in the Args block without adding new meaning, so it earns the baseline score.

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 ("Terminates") and resource ("a session's shell process"), and adds "forgets it" to distinguish closing from mere suspension. This clearly differentiates it from siblings like open_terminal_session, list_terminal_sessions, and write_to_terminal.

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 intended use is implied by the destructive verb "Terminates" and the reference to closing a session, but there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over siblings. The error note hints that the session must exist, but it does not suggest checking list_terminal_sessions first or mention any exclusions.

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