create_session_by_id_close

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true, so the description doesn't need to state idempotency. But the description omits behavioral details like whether closing a session is irreversible, what side effects occur (e.g., invalidating tokens), or whether it requires authentication. It also refers to the 'body' payload but doesn't explain what happens with it beyond 'act on session close'. Without annotations for destruction, the description carries the burden and falls short on depth.

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 extremely short, using four lines. It front-loads the purpose and endpoint, then gives a brief instruction for the body. There is no fluff, but it could have provided more substance without being verbose. The brevity is acceptable, but the lack of detail makes it less useful.

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 that the body is an open object with no schema and the description defers to other endpoints, the tool lacks complete information for an agent to construct a valid request. The presence of an output schema helps, but the body's semantics are undefined. For a tool that's about closing a session, the agent needs to know what fields the body might acceptchers, which is not provided. This is a significant gap.

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 0% and there are only 2 parameters: id and body. The description mentions 'id' as a path parameter and 'body' as a request payload, but the body is an open object with no documented fields, and it explicitly defers to the GET or /schema endpoint. This does little to clarify parameter semantics beyond what the schema already shows; the description should have explained more about the body's expected structure.

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 states the verb and resource: 'Create or act on session close' with the endpoint '/api/session/{id}/close', which clearly indicates closing a session. It distinguishes somewhat from siblings like create_session_by_id_sync, though not explicitly. The phrase 'or act on' is slightly vague, but the endpoint clarifies.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only says to read the matching GET or /schema endpoint to understand the body fields, which implies a need for discovery but not a clear context for when closing a session is appropriate. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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