Stop stream

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the stream is closed, implying it becomes unusable and resources are released, but it does not say whether buffered audio or untranscribed data is discarded — a key fact given the save/export siblings.

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 short, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It is arguably too terse for a lifecycle-terminating operation, but nothing in the text wastes space.

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?

With no parameters and no output schema there is little structural burden, and annotations cover the safety hints. However, for a stream-terminating tool the description omits what state changes on the server side and whether any pending audio is lost, which an agent needs in order to sequence it correctly relative to save/export.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. Schema coverage is 100% and no argument interpretation is required.

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?

States a specific verb (stop) and resource (the audio stream) plus the additional closing action, which clearly pairs against the sibling 'audio_transcriber_initiate_stream'. It does not explicitly disambiguate from save_stream/export beyond the plain meaning of 'stop', but an agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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 is only implied by the lifecycle pairing with initiate_stream; there is no statement of when to call this versus saving or exporting the stream first. The existence of audio_transcriber_save_stream and audio_transcriber_export makes that ordering decision non-trivial, and the description stays silent on it.

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