herdr_pane_close

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, so 'Destructive' in the description merely repeats structured data with no added value. The description adds nothing about whether running processes in the pane are killed, whether the close is reversible, or what happens on failure — meaningful gaps for a destructive operation.

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 short fragments with the purpose front-loaded. Nothing wasted, but also nothing beyond the bare minimum — structure is fine within the very low information it delivers.

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?

A destructive, non-idempotent mutation tool with no output schema and no annotation beyond safety hints. The description should disclose consequences (running jobs terminated, orphaned children, irreversibility) and relationship to sibling close tools. Instead it offers two words of content.

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% and the schema itself documents both parameters ('Pane id.', 'Must be true.'). The description adds no semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Close a pane'), which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like herdr_tab_close or herdr_workspace_close that operate on different scopes. The one-line format is minimal but unambiguous.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus herdr_tab_close or herdr_workspace_close, no prerequisites, no mention of cascade effects. The destructive label provides a caution signal but doesn't route the agent between alternatives.

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