stop_video_stream

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it closes the viewer window but doesn't disclose whether stopping affects the underlying device, whether resources are freed, or what happens if no stream is active. With annotations covering safety, this is adequate 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?

Single sentence, zero wasted words. Front-loads the action before the detail about the viewer window. Perfectly sized for a simple stop operation.

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 'stop' action with strong annotations (idempotent, non-destructive) and an output schema present, the description covers the essential purpose. It could mention whether this is the required cleanup for start_video_stream but the description is otherwise sufficient for a focused operation.

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 'serial' parameter is well-described as a device serial number in the schema. The description contextually clarifies serial refers to the device whose stream is being stopped, which aligns with the sibling convention. Only one parameter, so burden is low.

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 clearly states the action (stop the HTTP MJPEG video stream) and the resource (device), with specific technical detail about the stream type. It distinguishes from start_video_stream sibling but could be more explicit about the viewer window component and why both are needed.

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 implies usage as the counterpart to start_video_stream but doesn't explicitly state when to use it vs alternatives, nor whether it's required before other operations. No mention of prerequisites or ordering constraints relative to siblings.

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