webview_disconnectRelease the CDP connection to a webview, freeing its unique socket for transfer to Appium or chromedriver. Use before handing over the webview to avoid conflicts.
断开本工具对 webview 的 CDP 连接,释放该 page 的唯一 CDP socket(把 webview 交给 Appium/chromedriver 前先调它)。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| device | Yes | 目标设备 serial(同 mobile_list_available_devices 的 id) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The destructiveHint annotation already marks this as destructive, and the description adds valuable context by naming what is destroyed: the only CDP socket for the page. It also explains the interop reason. It doesn't cover edge cases like calling it when already disconnected, but the main side effect is disclosed.
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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The action and resource come first, and the timing rationale is tucked into a short parenthetical that earns its place.
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 simple one-parameter destructive tool with annotations and no output schema, this description provides enough context: what it disconnects, what it releases, and when to call it. A no-op or already-disconnected behavior would be a nice extra, but it isn't essential for correct 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 coverage is 100%, and the single device parameter is already described in the schema as a target device serial matching mobile_list_available_devices id. The description doesn't repeat or expand parameter semantics, but the schema carries the needed meaning.
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 a specific action: disconnecting this tool's CDP connection to the webview and releasing the page's unique CDP socket. This goes beyond the title and makes the tool's role distinct from webview_connect and other webview operations.
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 gives a concrete usage condition: call this before handing the webview over to Appium/chromedriver. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it stops short of full routing guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.