pix_close_capture

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

The description contradicts the annotations: it says 'optionally deleting its cached artifacts' while destructiveHint is false. This is a direct conflict about whether the tool performs destructive operations, so the description is behaviorally misleading.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the core action and the optional modifier without wasted words. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's behavior.

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?

The tool is simple and has an output schema, so return values need no explanation. However, the description leaves the destructive nature of cache deletion ambiguous relative to the annotations, and it does not clarify what happens to the capture session when clear_cache is true or false.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the prose must carry parameter semantics. The phrase 'optionally deleting its cached artifacts' gives meaning to clear_cache, but capture_id is only implied by its name and type. The description partially compensates for the missing schema descriptions but does not fully document both parameters.

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 clearly states the operation: 'Close a capture session' with a specific verb and resource, and adds the optional cache-deletion behavior. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pix_open_capture and pix_list_open_captures without 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?

The lifecycle language implies it should be used when finished with a capture session, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or comparison with alternatives such as pix_clear_capture_cache. The optional clear_cache behavior is surfaced but without guidance on when to set it.

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