Stop a GDevelop preview

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds specific details about what gets destroyed: the loopback HTTP server and the preview's temporary directory, scoped to 'only this preview'. This is valuable scoping context beyond the annotation.

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, focused sentence with no extraneous content. Front-loaded and easy to parse, making it highly concise.

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 operation, the description covers the key behaviors (stopping server, removing temp dir) and adds scoping ('only this preview'). However, it omits any mention of the previewId parameter or what happens if the preview does not exist, but given low complexity and the presence of annotations, it is adequate.

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?

The description does not mention the previewId parameter or explain how to obtain/use it. With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, but it doesn't add any parameter-related meaning. The parameter name itself is suggestive, but the description should clarify what identifies the preview.

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 action ('stop the loopback HTTP server') and identifies the exact resource ('only this preview's temporary directory'). It clearly differentiates from siblings like build_preview and get_preview_status, as this is the stopping counterpart.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives (e.g., close_project or build_preview). The usage is implied by the tool name and title, but the description provides no direct statement of when to invoke it.

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