adb_shell_close

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the primary action and mentions terminating the adb process, but it does not describe error behavior, idempotency, or what happens with an invalid session ID. The ambiguous 'adb process' term adds some context but also confusion.

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 a single sentence, front-loaded with the core action, and contains no filler. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity, earning 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is mostly adequate, but it does not cover potential side effects or failure modes. The ambiguous 'terminate the adb process' wording leaves room for misinterpretation about the tool's full impact.

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 input schema already provides a clear description for session_id ('The session ID returned by adb_shell_open'), and the tool description adds no further parameter semantics. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Close an ADB shell session' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like adb_shell_open and adb_shell_write. However, the phrase 'terminate the adb process' introduces ambiguity about the scope (shell process vs. entire adb server), slightly reducing clarity.

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 usage (call this when done with an ADB shell session) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like having an open session. It lacks the exclusions or alternative references seen in stronger examples.

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