close_workbook

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses destructive default (unsaved changes discarded), return value (closed name and remaining open workbooks), and error condition (raises if not open).

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: first states the action and key parameter, second details default, optional save, return, and error. Every sentence provides essential information without fluff.

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 low complexity, complete schema coverage, and existence of output schema (return values described), the description fully covers all necessary information for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 is 3. Description adds context: explains default for 'save' and consequence, and provides example for 'workbook_name' ('risk.xlsx'), enhancing understanding beyond schema types.

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?

Description clearly states the verb ('Close') and resource ('an open workbook by file name'). It specifies the default behavior regarding saving. No other tool in siblings has a close function, so it is well-distinguished.

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 explains the default action (discard unsaved changes) and the optional save behavior, plus error condition. It does not explicitly compare to siblings, but the context is clear as there is no alternative close tool.

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