android_force_stop_app

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context: the Shizuku authorization requirement and the self-force-stop limitation. It does not contradict the 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 short, purposeful sentences with the action front-loaded and constraints immediately after. There is no filler, and the self-exclusion statement earns its place by preventing a plausible wrong invocation.

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 destructive operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the critical authorization gate but leaves 'validated package' undefined and does not explain what happens to the target app when force-stopped or when the call would fail. It is adequate but not rich enough for fully confident invocation.

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%, so the description needed to explain packageName, but it only refers to 'a validated package,' which is vague. The schema's regex and maxLength carry the entire burden of parameter meaning; the description does not meaningfully compensate.

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 names a specific action ('force-stop') and a specific resource ('a validated package'), which clearly differentiates this tool from the many Android companion tools in the sibling list. It also adds a meaningful scope note that MCP Android cannot force-stop itself.

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 clearly states the tool is only usable through 'explicitly-authorized Shizuku only,' giving the agent a concrete precondition and limiting when the tool should be attempted. It also states one exclusion (cannot force-stop itself), but it does not mention alternatives or broader when-to-use guidance.

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