interceptor_camoufox_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. It discloses destructive actions (killing, removing directories), providing transparency beyond what a read-only annotation might. Missing details like error handling or idempotency are minor given the tool's simple cleanup role.

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?

A single sentence efficiently conveys the tool's purpose, actions, and input source. No superfluous information.

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?

The description adequately covers the tool's behavior for a simple cleanup operation with one parameter. It lacks details about return values (no output schema) and handling of invalid inputs, but these are minor omissions.

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 describes target_id fully (100% coverage). The description merely restates it as 'from interceptor_camoufox_launch', adding no new semantics beyond the schema. 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?

The description clearly states the tool closes a camoufox instance launched by interceptor_camoufox_launch, specifying actions like killing the launcher and removing directories. This distinctly sets it apart from sibling tools like interceptor_camoufox_launch, info, and list.

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 implies usage after a launch, with no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use. However, the context of sibling tools (e.g., interceptor_browser_close) helps differentiate, making usage relatively clear.

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