stop_app

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explains the default target behavior ('Omit pid to stop the last launched app'), which adds useful context, but it does not disclose side effects such as process termination consequences or what happens if no app is 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 two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and immediately provides the key usage nuance about omitting pid.

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 simple one-parameter tool, the description covers the essential workflow and default behavior. Since an output schema exists, return values need not be described. The only minor gap is the absence of error or edge-case behavior, but overall it is sufficiently complete.

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 100% and the pid parameter is already well-documented in the schema, including its default and when it is required. The description mostly restates the schema's guidance, so it adds little beyond the structured field definition.

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 ('a previously launched app'), and ties it explicitly to launch_app, which distinguishes it from the sibling tools. There is no ambiguity about what this tool does.

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 clear usage context: stop an app started via launch_app, and omit pid to stop the last launched app. It does not explicitly discuss when not to use it, but since no sibling tool handles stopping an app, the context is sufficient.

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