stop_watching

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the action without disclosing behavior like error conditions, idempotency, whether the watch must exist, or safety profile (does not delete the file). Minimal behavioral insight beyond the verb.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the action, zero unnecessary words. It is concise and immediately informative.

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?

Tool complexity is low (one parameter, no output schema), but without annotations, the agent lacks context on side effects or prerequisites. The description is functionally adequate but does not cover potential questions like 'what happens if path is not being watched?'

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 'Path to stop watching' fully documenting the parameter. The description adds no extra semantic value beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Stop watching a file or directory' uses a specific verb (Stop) and resource (watching a file/directory), making the action clear. It distinguishes from siblings like watch_file by being the inverse operation.

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 (when you want to stop watching a path), but no explicit context or alternatives are mentioned. The tool's counterpart (watch_file) is in the siblings list, but the description itself does not provide guidance on when to use this vs. others.

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