tidal_hush

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 clearly discloses the core behavior (stops all currently playing patterns) and the urgency ('immediately'), but it does not explain side effects, reversibility, or what 'clear everything' means for the Tidal state beyond stopping patterns. This is a moderate gap for a mutating tool.

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 consists of two short sentences that are front-loaded with the action. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description covers the essential action and the intended usage context. It could be more complete by noting whether the stop is reversible or what happens to the pattern definitions afterwards, but for a simple stop-all command it is largely sufficient.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline 4 applies. There is no parameter meaning to add, and the description correctly avoids referencing nonexistent arguments.

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'), a specific resource ('all currently playing patterns'), and a timing qualifier ('immediately'). The phrase 'clear everything' reinforces the scope. It does not explicitly distinguish from siblings like tidal_silence, but the action is 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?

Gives a direct instruction: 'Use this to clear everything.' This tells an agent when the tool is the right choice. It does not mention when not to use it or name alternatives such as tidal_silence, so falls short of an explicit routing guide.

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