停止录制

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 does disclose that statistics and artifact paths are produced on stop, which is useful behavior beyond structured fields. However, it says nothing about whether a partially completed recording is persisted, whether the call is idempotent, or what happens when no recording is active.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for the operation, though slightly terse given the absence of annotations.

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?

Since no output schema exists, the description helpfully previews the return content (statistics and artifact paths). But for a stop/mutation operation with zero annotation coverage, it omits error conditions and side effects, leaving meaningful gaps.

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%, and the schema already explains the recordingId semantics including the 'omit to stop all' behavior. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('结束实时录制' – end live recording) and states the outcome ('输出统计信息与产物路径'). It is clearly distinct from recording_start, but it does not distinguish itself from the nearby capture_stop sibling, leaving the recording-vs-capture boundary implicit.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the obvious alternatives (capture_stop, recording_start). An agent must infer from the sibling list whether this is the correct stop tool for a given capture session.

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