stop_movement

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden. It transparently states the effect on movement and pathfinding, but does not disclose whether it cancels queued commands, whether it is reversible, or what state the bot ends in. The scope is clear but side effects are unspecified.

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 well-structured sentence that is front-loaded and contains no filler. It is appropriately sized for a parameterless tool.

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, parameterless command with no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It could add a note about whether this stops automatic pathfinding in progress, but the main purpose is fully captured.

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 and schema coverage is complete, so there is nothing for parameter docs to add. The description still usefully clarifies that the action covers both literal movement and pathfinding.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'stop' with resource 'all movement and pathfinding', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like stop_attack, goto, and follow_player. It states exactly what the tool does.

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?

Usage context is implied: this is the tool to call when movement or pathfinding should halt, especially after goto/follow_player. However, the description does not explicitly state when to use it, mention alternatives, or exclude cases like stopping attacks.

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