detener_simulacion

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It simply says 'stops the simulation' without detailing side effects (e.g., does it reset the scene, clear object states, or just halt execution?). No mention of prerequisites, reversibility, or impact on related tools. This is minimal disclosure for a state-changing operation.

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, clear sentence. It is concise and front-loaded with the action verb. No extraneous wording.

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 (no params, no side effects stated), and there is an output schema (though not shown). However, given the lack of annotations, the description could benefit from mentioning any relevant behavioral details such as whether the simulation state resets or if it returns a status. Since it's a straightforward stop command, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 and 100% schema description coverage (since it's empty). Baseline for 0 params is 4. The description adds no parameter info, but none is needed. It correctly reflects a parameterless operation.

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: 'Detiene la simulación en CoppeliaSim' (stops the simulation in CoppeliaSim). It uses a specific verb ('Detiene') and resource ('la simulación'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'pausar_simulacion' (pause) and 'iniciar_simulacion' (start). No ambiguity.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like pausar_simulacion or estado_simulacion. The description only states what it does, not whether it should be used for stopping vs pausing, or any prerequisites. Without explicit usage context, the agent may mis-select.

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