stop_auto_play

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It does state the terminating effect and that final statistics are returned, but it omits details such as what happens if no loop is running, whether the stop is reversible, or any side effects beyond termination.

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 sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the primary action ('stop') and immediately follows with the expected return value, making it easy to parse.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides the essential behavioral contract: it stops the loop and returns final statistics. The return value is described only vaguely, but in context this is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool appropriately.

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 is empty (0 parameters), so the description has no obligation to explain parameter meanings. Per the rubric, zero-parameter tools receive a baseline of 4, and the description does not introduce conflicting or redundant param information.

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 uses a specific verb ('stop') and a specific resource ('the running auto-play game loop'), and clearly states the outcome ('return final statistics'). This distinguishes it from siblings like auto_play and get_auto_play_status without needing to open their definitions.

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 phrase '正在运行的' (running) signals that the tool should only be used when an auto-play loop is active, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, which keeps it just below a top score.

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