End the signed-in user's current fast now (or at the given time) by recording an eating event in Still.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "still_end_fast"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| at | No | ISO 8601 timestamp, defaults to now |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations only declare the generic safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false). The description adds real value by disclosing the side effect: it ends the fast by recording an eating event, which explains the mutation and hints at non-idempotency. It does not state the failure mode when no fast is in progress.
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?
One sentence, zero waste, with the action and its mechanism front-loaded before the optional time qualifier.
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 one-optional-parameter mutation with no output schema and adequate annotations, the description covers the essentials. The only meaningful gap is the precondition/error behavior when there is no active fast.
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 optional parameter is already documented as an ISO 8601 timestamp defaulting to now. The parenthetical '(or at the given time)' restates that rather than adding new semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb ('End'), a specific resource ('the signed-in user's current fast'), and the mechanism used ('recording an eating event'). It is clearly the inverse of still_start_fast and distinct from still_get_fasting_state, though it never names a sibling explicitly.
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?
Usage is implied by 'current fast' and the optional time override, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over still_get_fasting_state, nor what happens if no fast is active. An agent must infer the precondition.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.