window_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 explaining behavior. It states only that the front window will be closed, but does not disclose consequences such as potential loss of unsaved work, irreversibility, or what happens if no window is available.

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, direct sentence with no filler or redundant content. It is appropriately sized for such a simple tool and immediately conveys the action.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, because closing is destructive and there are no annotations, the description should ideally warn about unsaved changes or mention that window_minimize is a non-destructive alternative. These gaps prevent it from being fully complete.

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 schema already describes appName as 'Application name' with 100% coverage, so the description adds no additional parameter meaning. The parameter is simple and self-explanatory, but the tool description does not clarify how appName is matched or how 'front window' is determined.

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 action ('Close') and the resource ('the front window of an application'), so an agent can understand the core purpose. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like window_minimize, but the verb 'close' makes the operation reasonably distinguishable.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use window_close versus alternatives such as window_minimize, window_focus, or window_resize. The description implies a simple dismissal of a window, but it gives no context about preferences, safety, or alternative operations.

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