debuggerDeleteListener

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

No annotations exist, and the description fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as side effects, permission requirements, or whether stopping a listener is reversible. The single sentence provides no additional 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 very concise but at the cost of informativeness. Every sentence should earn its place; here, one sentence is insufficient to convey necessary details, making it overly terse rather than efficiently informative.

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 complexity of debugger tools, the absence of output schema, and no behavioral context, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the concept of a debug listener, the effect of stopping it, or any requirements (e.g., must be currently listening).

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 covers all 4 parameters with descriptions, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline of 3.

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 'Stops a debug listener' clearly states the action and the resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like debuggerListen (likely starts) and debuggerListeners (lists). However, it is minimal and assumes knowledge of what a debug listener is.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., debuggerListen, debuggerListeners). The description gives no context about prerequisites or typical scenarios.

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