Auto Switch Off

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

Annotations already declare non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds real value by stating the on-air state is preserved (non-disruptive effect) and that runtime stats come back. It stops short of saying what happens if auto-switch is not currently running, which the idempotentHint only partially implies.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and its state consequence, then the return payload. No filler or restatement of the title.

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, the description carries the burden of return information and does so by naming the two stats returned. Only gap is the no-op case when auto-switch is already off.

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.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Stop auto-switching mode') and immediately clarifies the resulting state ('current program input stays on air — switching simply stops following the active speaker'), which distinguishes it cleanly from atem_auto_switch_on and atem_cut_to_active_speaker.

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 implied by the semantics of stopping the mode, and the effect statement helps an agent understand the consequence. However, it never names the counterpart tool (atem_auto_switch_on) or points to atem_get_auto_switch_status for checking state before/after, so routing guidance is left to inference.

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