record_window_stop

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool stops a recording, implying a mutation action, but lacks details on permissions, side effects (e.g., whether the recording is saved or discarded), error handling, or response format. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation 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 is a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and wastes no space, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick understanding.

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?

Given the tool's complexity as a mutation operation with no annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It lacks crucial details like behavioral traits, parameter explanations, and expected outcomes, making it inadequate for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented parameter. It mentions 'recording_id' indirectly by referencing record_window_start, but provides no explicit explanation of the parameter's meaning, format, or how to obtain it, failing to add sufficient value beyond the bare schema.

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 a recording') and references the specific resource ('recording started with record_window_start'), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings like record_window_start by indicating it's the complementary stop operation, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other recording-related tools like record_window_duration.

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 by referencing record_window_start as the prerequisite, suggesting this tool should be used after starting a recording. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives among siblings like record_window_duration, leaving some ambiguity in context.

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