stop_captureStops the capture proxy while preserving captured entries in the buffer. Use to halt HTTP(S) traffic capture without losing recorded data.
Stop the capture proxy. Captured entries already in the buffer are preserved.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: it reassures that buffered entries are preserved, clarifying the side-effect scope of stopping capture.
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?
Two short sentences, the action front-loaded and the side-effect caveat immediately after. No wasted words.
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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema lifecycle toggle, the description covers the essential behavior and the buffer-preservation effect. It could note whether capture can be resumed or what state results, but nothing critical is missing.
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?
The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing further for the description to clarify about inputs.
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?
States a specific verb ('Stop') and resource ('the capture proxy'), making the operation unambiguous and clearly the inverse of the start_capture sibling. It stops short of explicitly naming or contrasting with siblings like start_capture or stop_session, so it falls just below the top tier.
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?
Usage is implied by the inverse relationship with start_capture, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or distinction from adjacent session-lifecycle tools such as stop_session or clear_traffic. The agent must infer the context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.