Stop Moving

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

The description discloses concrete behavioral effects: canceling pathfinding goals and releasing movement keys. This adds context beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false) by detailing what exactly the tool does to the agent's movement state.

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 two sentences long, with the primary action in the first sentence and usage guidance in the second. Every word earns its place, and the structure is perfectly front-loaded.

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, zero-parameter action tool with clear annotations and no output schema, the description fully covers purpose and usage. It also appropriately references the kinds of goals it cancels (goto/follow), making it complete for the agent's needs.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description has no parameter details to provide. The mention of 'goto/follow' is contextual rather than parameter-related. Baseline 4 is appropriate for zero-param tools where the schema already shows an empty object.

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 a specific action: 'Cancels any active pathfinding goal (goto/follow) and releases all movement keys.' This distinguishes it from sibling movement tools like goto_position, goto_player, and follow_player, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 provides explicit usage context with 'Use this to interrupt movement in progress.' While it does not name alternative tools or specify when not to use it, it gives a clear directive for when this tool is appropriate.

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