Force-quits a running app on a connected iOS device by bundle ID, stopping it for development testing.
Force-quit an app.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| device | No | Device UDID or name substring. Defaults to the select_device choice, then IOS_DEVICE_MCP_DEVICE, else the single USB-connected device. | |
| bundleId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. "Force-quit" implies a forceful termination that may lose unsaved state, but the description does not state permissions, reversibility, effects on running app data, or what happens if the app is not running.
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 front-loaded and free of filler. It is extremely terse, but its brevity is not caused by redundant or poorly ordered text.
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 and no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits required-parameter meaning, device targeting behavior, and the effect of force-quitting on the app or its data.
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 only 50%, and the required bundleId parameter has no schema description. The description does not explain that bundleId identifies the app to terminate or how the optional device parameter affects targeting, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.
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 states a specific verb and resource: force-quit an app. This is clear enough to distinguish it from open_url, install_app, and launch_app, though it does not explicitly contrast with uninstall_app.
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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as launch_app or uninstall_app, nor are there prerequisites or exclusions. The phrase "force-quit" implies forced termination, but no explicit usage conditions are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.