close_lab

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses important side effects: it releases the session binding and leaves the viewer account, stopping browser tracking. However, it does not clarify whether the lab itself is terminated or just detached, which limits full transparency.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The main action is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds a relevant side effect. Every word earns its place.

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 zero-parameter tool with an output schema, the description adequately covers the main behavior and a key side effect. It could mention the fate of the lab resources, but the low complexity and presence of an output schema make this description sufficient.

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, so the schema already fully covers parameter expectations. The description adds value by clarifying that the session acted upon is the 'current' one, which is implicit state rather than a parameter.

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 ('Leave') with a resource ('current lab session') and adds a clarifying parenthetical ('releases the session binding'). It also mentions leaving the viewer account, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like open_lab and join_viewer.

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 the tool is used when ending a lab session, but it does not explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives or when not to use it. No sibling tool is mentioned as an alternative, so guidance is only inferred.

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