Stop the rented browser session to end billing and prevent additional charges.
Stop the rented browser session and end billing.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "browser-stop"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that billing ends, which is a key behavioral outcome. However, it does not mention other important behaviors like whether session data is saved or destroyed, or any side effects. The transparency is adequate but not comprehensive.
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, perfectly sized for the 0-parameter tool. Every word is necessary and directly contributes to understanding. No redundant text, and the key information is front-loaded.
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 tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete: it states the primary action and the billing consequence. However, it could be slightly improved by noting what returns (e.g., success status) or any cleanup actions. Still, for a simple stop action, it covers the essentials.
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 tool has no parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (no parameters defined). According to the guidelines, 0 parameters baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter semantics, and it correctly focuses on the tool's action.
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 action ('Stop') and the resource ('rented browser session'), and adds the consequential effect ('end billing'). It distinctly separates this tool from siblings like browser-navigate or rent-browser, which perform different actions.
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 that this tool is used to stop a rented browser session and end billing, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives (e.g., after rent-browser) or provide any prerequisites or warnings. The guidance is minimal and implicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.