stop_app

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It names the action ('force-stop') and compares it to Settings, but it does not mention side effects, such as losing unsaved app state, stopping background processes, or that the app can be relaunched afterward.

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 concise sentence with no filler or repetition. It is front-loaded with the core action, though it sacrifices useful detail for brevity.

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?

The description is too minimal for a mutation tool with no annotations and zero parameter coverage in the schema. While the output schema may cover return values, the agent still lacks guidance on when to call this tool, what the parameters mean, and what side effects force-stopping may have.

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 must compensate by explaining parameters, but it does not mention package or serial at all. An agent must infer that 'package' identifies the target app and that 'serial' is an optional device selector.

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-stopping ('force-stop') an application, with a useful analogy to the Settings UI. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, but the force-stop action is clearly distinct from sibling tools like launch_app, uninstall_app, or clear_app_data.

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 clear_app_data, uninstall_app, or launch_app. The description conveys what happens but not when the agent should choose this tool or what conditions make it appropriate.

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