Stops the background dialog watcher and returns a log of dialogs that were automatically dismissed, so you can finish operations that required watcher monitoring.
Stop the background dialog watcher and return its log of all dialogs that were auto-dismissed. Use after completing an operation that required the watcher.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description covers the key behavior—stopping the watcher and returning a log. It does not elaborate on side effects like log clearing, but the action is straightforward and sufficiently disclosed.
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 consists of two concise, front-loaded sentences. Every sentence adds value: first states what it does, second provides usage timing. No wasted words.
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, no output schema, and is a simple stop action, the description is adequate. It could optionally detail the log format, but the current info is sufficient for an agent to understand its role.
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 input schema has no parameters, so schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description adds no parameter details, which is acceptable since none are needed.
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 tool stops a background dialog watcher and returns its log. It identifies a specific resource and action, and distinguishes from siblings like cst_start_dialog_watcher and cst_dismiss_dialogs.
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 provides explicit usage context: 'Use after completing an operation that required the watcher.' This implies it should be called after starting the watcher, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare to alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.