mcp-electron-driver

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes the tool's behavior ('close cleanly') and safety characteristic ('safe to call even if no app is running'), which are crucial for understanding its operation. It doesn't cover potential side effects or error handling, but provides sufficient core behavioral context.

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 two short sentences that are front-loaded with the primary purpose and follow with an important usage note. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or 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 the tool's simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description provides adequate context for understanding what the tool does and when to use it. It could potentially mention what 'cleanly' entails or confirm no return value, but for this complexity level, it's reasonably complete.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameters, and it doesn't introduce any parameter-related confusion, maintaining the appropriate baseline score.

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 specific action ('Close the running Electron app cleanly') and resource ('Electron app'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'start_app' which would initiate the app. It provides precise verb+resource pairing with no ambiguity.

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 explicitly states 'Safe to call even if no app is running,' which provides clear context on when it's appropriate to use this tool. However, it doesn't mention alternatives or explicitly differentiate from other shutdown-related tools (none are listed in siblings), so it falls short of a perfect 5.

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