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

Annotations already convey non-read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that resources are released, which is useful context, but it doesn't detail consequences like whether session data is invalidated or what happens to related search results. This is acceptable but not rich.

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 is front-loaded with the usage condition and immediately states the resource-release consequence. Every word contributes value; there is no fluff or redundancy.

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 idempotent stop operation with two documented parameters and an output schema, the description covers what the tool is for and when to invoke it. It could mention idempotency or invalid-session behavior, but annotations already cover idempotency, so nothing critical is missing.

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%, with both sessionId and device already documented as returned by start_search and list_devices respectively. The description adds no supplementary parameter meaning, 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 ('stop') and resource ('search session') and adds the purpose of releasing resources. It is clear and not a tautology, but it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like start_search or get_more_search_results, though the action is distinct enough by name.

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 an explicit condition for use: when a search session is no longer needed and should release its resources. It provides clear context but does not mention exclusions or alternative tools, so it falls just short of full guidance.

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