ampl_close_session

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

The description adds a useful behavioral detail—removal of the workdir if the server created it—which goes beyond a mere 'close' verb. However, with no annotations, it does not disclose whether the operation is reversible, what happens to unsaved data, or whether calling it on an already-closed session is safe.

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 of 11 words, front-loaded with the primary action. Every word earns its place, and it is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 session lifecycle context and lack of annotations, the description omits critical information: the meaning of the 'name' parameter, when to invoke this tool vs. sibling session tools, and the consequences of disposal. The presence of an output schema does not compensate for these gaps.

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 sole parameter 'name' is entirely undocumented. The schema shows only its type (string or null) with a default of null, and the description does not mention it. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to clarify whether 'name' identifies the session or something else.

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 'Dispose the engine, removing the workdir if the server created it' clearly identifies this as a session teardown operation. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like ampl_init_session (creation), ampl_use_session (selection), and ampl_restart_session (restart).

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 offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not state that it should be called when finished with a session, nor does it exclude usage during active work or mention any prerequisites.

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