finish_debug_session

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the main actions (stopping actuators, resetting, running, disconnecting) but omits prerequisites, reversibility, or broader side effects (e.g., clearing breakpoints). The core behavior is stated, but depth is lacking.

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?

A single sentence that clearly lists the operation sequence is highly concise and front-loaded. No wasted words; every element contributes to the meaning.

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?

Despite the name, the description does not explicitly state this finishes a debug session or indicate when it should be used. Given the sibling tools, an agent may struggle to choose this over disconnect_all. The lack of context on invocation scenarios is a significant gap.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is fully covered (empty schema). The baseline for 0-param tools is 4, and since there is nothing to explain, the description adds no parameter info but also needs none.

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 uses a specific verb sequence (stop, reset, run, disconnect) with a clear resource (the target). It distinguishes from siblings like disconnect_all, which only disconnects, and read_stopped_context, which reads. The purpose is explicit and non-tautological.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention session termination, prerequisites, or conditions. An agent cannot infer when this is the correct choice over disconnect_all or other tools.

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