session_close

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Close') but does not describe what closing entails (e.g., whether it terminates processes, requires confirmation, or is reversible), potential side effects, or permissions needed. For a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by a concise parameter explanation. Every sentence earns its place by providing essential information without redundancy, making it efficiently structured and easy to parse.

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 complexity (destructive action, one parameter) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is minimally adequate. However, with no annotations and incomplete behavioral details, it leaves gaps in understanding the full impact of closing a session, making it only partially complete for safe agent use.

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 description adds meaningful semantics beyond the input schema, which has 0% description coverage. It explains that 'session_id' targets a specific session and can be omitted for the active session, clarifying default behavior and usage. With only one parameter, this compensation is effective, though it doesn't detail format constraints (e.g., ID 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 clearly states the verb ('Close') and resource ('an iTerm2 session'), making the purpose specific and unambiguous. It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like session_clear, session_restart, or tab_close by focusing on session termination rather than clearing content, restarting, or closing tabs.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool by specifying it closes sessions in iTerm2. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives (e.g., vs. tab_close or window_close for different resources), though the sibling list helps infer distinctions. The guidance is practical but lacks explicit exclusions.

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