app.stop

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses nothing. It does not say whether the stop is graceful or forced, whether background processes and cached state are cleared, whether it requires the app to be currently running, or what error occurs if the package is not installed or already stopped.

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?

At four characters there is no wasted padding, but brevity here is under-specification rather than conciseness — the single sentence carries no actionable detail. It also mixes languages with an otherwise English tool surface.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented required parameter, the definition is entirely inadequate. An agent cannot determine the argument format, the effect on running state, or the failure modes before invoking it.

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 description coverage is 0% and the single required parameter 'pkg' is undocumented anywhere. The description does not explain that the argument is a package identifier (e.g. com.android.settings), whether it accepts a display name, or whether multiple packages can be passed.

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 '停止应用' is a direct restatement of the tool name app.stop, adding no information an agent could not already infer from the identifier. It names a verb and resource but provides zero differentiation from siblings such as app.launch, app.current, or app.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?

There is no indication of when to use this tool versus app.launch (its inverse) or app.list/app.current, nor any precondition such as 'the target app must be running'. Usage is only implied by the tool name itself.

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