Close tabs

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so safety is covered structurally. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: closing the session target tab changes session-follow behavior back to the user's active tab, a non-obvious side effect an agent would otherwise miss.

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 sentences, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded and the caveat placed second. Every clause carries information the agent cannot get elsewhere.

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 full annotation coverage, the essentials are present: what it closes, where ids come from, and the session side effect. Minor gap: no statement on behavior for unknown or already-closed tab ids.

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%, so baseline would be 3, but the description adds meaning by identifying where tab ids come from (tabs_list) and reinforcing that multiple ids are accepted, matching minItems: 1. It does not explain invalid-id or partial-failure behavior.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Closes one or more tabs') and scopes it by id, plus names the source of those ids (tabs_list). This differentiates it from tab_open, tab_select, and tabs_list without needing the schema.

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 '(from tabs_list)' parenthetical implies a prerequisite flow, but the description never states when to close versus when to select or navigate away, nor any exclusion. Usage is inferable rather than explicit.

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