jdwp-mcp

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. 'End debug session' confirms the operation is destructive/terminal but fails to disclose critical behaviors: whether the debuggee process continues running after disconnect, whether breakpoints are preserved, or if resources are cleaned up.

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?

Extremely concise (three words) and front-loaded with the verb. While appropriately sized for the simplicity of the tool, the minimalism borders on under-specification given the lack of behavioral annotations.

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?

Adequate for a zero-parameter tool with simple intent, but gaps remain regarding session lifecycle implications. Without annotations or output schema, the description should explain what 'ending' entails (cleanup, process state, etc.).

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?

Zero parameters per input schema (coverage 100%), so baseline 4 applies. Description neither adds nor subtracts value regarding parameters.

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?

Clear verb ('End') and resource ('debug session'), but lacks explicit differentiation from sibling tools like debug.attach or debug.pause. Given the sibling context, it implies the opposite of attach, but this is not stated.

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 guidance on when to use (e.g., 'when finished debugging') versus alternatives (e.g., debug.pause). No mention of prerequisites or side effects.

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