debuggerDeleteListener

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action ('stops') without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose if this is destructive (likely yes, but unconfirmed), requires specific permissions, has side effects (e.g., ending debugging sessions), or what happens on success/failure. More context on impact is needed.

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, direct sentence with zero waste—'Stops a debug listener' is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core purpose without unnecessary elaboration.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool with 4 required parameters and likely destructive behavior. It lacks details on what 'stops' entails operationally, expected outcomes, or error conditions, making it insufficient for safe and effective use.

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%, so parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying these parameters identify the listener to stop. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter documentation adequately.

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 'Stops a debug listener' clearly states the action (stops) and resource (debug listener), but it's somewhat vague about what a debug listener entails. It distinguishes from siblings like 'debuggerListen' (starts) and 'debuggerListeners' (lists), but doesn't specify if it's for a specific session or all listeners, leaving room for interpretation.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., must have an active listener), exclusions, or related tools like 'debuggerDeleteBreakpoints' for cleanup. Usage is implied from the name but not elaborated.

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