Stop Recording

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false (write operation), destructiveHint=false (safe), and idempotentHint=true (safe to retry). The description adds context about what gets stopped (recording), which is valuable beyond annotations. It doesn't mention side effects like file saving or status changes, but annotations cover the safety profile well.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero waste. Every word earns its place: 'Stop' (action), 'recording' (what), 'on the ATEM' (where). No unnecessary elaboration.

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 0-parameter tool with good annotations (idempotent, non-destructive), the description is reasonably complete. It states the action clearly. Without an output schema, it doesn't explain return values (e.g., success confirmation), but that's acceptable given the tool's simplicity.

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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to explain parameters since none exist, and it correctly reflects this by not mentioning any inputs.

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 'Stop recording on the ATEM' clearly states the specific action (stop recording) and target resource (ATEM). It distinguishes from siblings like 'atem_start_recording' and 'atem_stop_streaming' by focusing on recording specifically, not streaming or other operations.

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 implies usage context (when recording is active), but doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites like needing 'atem_start_recording' first or exclusions like not working if disconnected. However, the sibling list shows clear alternatives for starting/stopping recording and streaming.

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