desktop_stop_cc

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states it exits and closes, implying destructive behavior, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., unsaved work, session state). No contradiction with annotations since none exist.

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?

Single sentence that is front-loaded with the purpose. Efficient but at the cost of omitting parameter details. Could be improved by adding brief parameter explanations.

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 2 parameters, no output schema, and a large set of sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It does not explain session_id (e.g., which session to stop), allow_frontmost behavior, or what happens after execution. Incomplete for safe agent invocation.

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 has 2 parameters (session_id and allow_frontmost) with 0% description coverage. The description provides no information about these parameters, leaving the agent to guess their meaning and impact. This is a critical gap.

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?

Description clearly states it exits Claude Code/Codex and closes the window. The verb '退出' (exit) and '关闭窗口' (close window) are specific. It distinguishes from siblings like cc_stop_session which stops a session but doesn't close the window. However, it could be clearer about what exactly is being closed (the application window).

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 this tool versus alternatives like cc_stop_session or desktop_focus_cc. No mention of prerequisites or scenarios where this should be avoided. The context of 37 sibling tools makes this omission significant.

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