stop_debug

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, so the destructive nature is clear. The description adds that it stops the session but does not elaborate on side effects (e.g., whether breakpoints are cleared, state is lost). It does not contradict annotations.

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 extremely concise: two short sentences. The first sentence states the action, the second provides a helpful pointer to an alternative (DAP escape hatch). No unnecessary 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?

Given no parameters and annotations, the description is adequate but could be improved by specifying which debug session is affected (e.g., the session started by start_debug). It does not explain input-output expectations, but it's a simple stop action.

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?

There are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter details. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate for zero-parameter tools.

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 tool's purpose: 'Stop the current debug session.' This is a specific verb-resource pair. However, among siblings there are similar tools like 'terminate_debug' and 'restart_debug', and the description does not explicitly differentiate from them, though the verb 'stop' is distinct.

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 provides minimal usage guidance. It only mentions an 'escape hatch' for DAP requests but does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., terminate_debug, pause_execution). There is no explicit advice on prerequisites or conditions.

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