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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds useful context beyond annotations by stating that the research result stays retrievable with get_research, clarifying that stopping updates does not delete the result. It does not address permissions or notification behavior.

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 wasted words. The parenthetical adds relevant retrieval context without bloating the definition.

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?

The tool has a full input schema, output schema, and rich annotations, so the description need not explain return values or safety profile. It adds the key behavioral note that results remain retrievable, making the definition complete enough for an agent to invoke it correctly. Minor gaps remain around when exactly to stop watching versus other research lifecycle actions.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the single job_id parameter is fully documented in the schema with format details. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: stop watching a research job. It also clarifies that the result remains retrievable via get_research, which helps distinguish this tool from retrieval and job-starting siblings. It does not explicitly differentiate from request_research, but the core purpose is clear.

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: call this when you no longer need live updates for a research job. The parenthetical points to get_research as the alternative for retrieving results, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions.

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