frida_compiler_watch_stop

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the core behavior (stopping tracking) but lacks details on side effects, resource cleanup, or permissions required. The behavior is straightforward, so minimal transparency is acceptable.

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 sentence of six words, directly stating the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no superfluous content.

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 simple action and single parameter, the description is mostly complete. However, it would benefit from mentioning that the watch_id likely comes from frida_compiler_watch and indicating what happens on success/failure, especially since no output schema is provided.

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. It indicates the 'watch_id' parameter identifies the record to stop, which adds meaning beyond the schema. However, it could explicitly link the ID to the one returned by frida_compiler_watch for clarity.

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 tracking a Compiler.watch() record.' It uses a specific verb ('stop') and resource ('Compiler.watch() record'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like frida_compiler_watch (start) and frida_compiler_watch_get_events (query).

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 implies usage context (stopping an existing watch record) but does not explicitly state when to use it, prerequisites (e.g., an active watch), or alternatives. It provides no guidance on exclusion or conditions.

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