Stop all movement

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 transparently lists three specific behaviors: canceling move_to, stopping movement, and clearing sprint/sneak. It does not mention edge cases like what happens if the player is mid-air or if movement resumes, but for a simple stop command this is adequate.

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?

One concise sentence lists all effects without wasting words. It is front-loaded with the most important action ('Cancel any in-progress move_to') and fully covers the tool's purpose.

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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description fully explains the tool's behavior and effects, making it complete for an agent to know how to invoke it. No additional context is needed.

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 coverage is 100% for the single optional 'player' parameter, and the schema already describes it as 'Online player name (defaults to the first online player).' The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so it doesn't improve on the schema's guidance.

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 exactly what the tool does: 'Cancel any in-progress move_to, stop the player's movement, and clear sprint/sneak.' It uses specific verbs and resources, listing three distinct effects, and clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like move_to, sprint, and sneak.

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 clearly implies its use cases: halt movement, cancel a move_to, or clear sprint/sneak. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but it's obvious from the action list when this tool should be used versus movement-starting or state-setting siblings.

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