stop_session

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

Annotations state idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description aligns by mentioning the fallback behavior to ADB commands. The description adds the useful behavior that tools continue working via ADB afterward, which is beyond the annotations. No contradiction with annotations.

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, zero waste. States the action and the fallback consequence concisely. Every word earns its place.

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 simple stop command with one optional parameter, high schema coverage, output schema present, and clear annotations, the description is complete. The fallback behavior note adds important context for a simple tool.

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% with the single 'serial' parameter documented as 'Device serial number'. The description doesn't add any further semantic meaning about the parameter beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Stop the active scrcpy session.' It specifies the action precisely. However, it doesn't distinguish itself from stop_video_stream or other stop-related siblings (screen_record_stop, stop_video_stream), though the scrcpy context implies different scope.

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 sentence 'Tools will fall back to ADB commands' gives clear post-condition context about what happens after stopping. It implies usage when scrcpy-based interaction is no longer needed, but doesn't explicitly name when to use vs alternatives or provide exclusion criteria.

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