Stop working live

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (idempotent, non-destructive, open-world), so the description's job is to add effect detail — and it does: teammates stop seeing the session and messages stop arriving. It does not say whether the live session can be resumed or what happens to already-sent messages, but the core observable effects are disclosed.

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?

A single sentence with the action front-loaded and two concrete consequences appended; nothing is wasted and nothing critical is buried.

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, no output schema, and annotations carrying the safety profile, the description covers what an agent needs to invoke it correctly. The one gap is recoverability — whether the live session can be restarted — which would help an agent decide before ending it.

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 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?

States a specific verb ('End') and resource ('this session's live session'), making the action unambiguous. It is distinguishable from start_live by the 'End' verb, though it never names the sibling explicitly.

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 scope word 'this session's' implies when the tool applies, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no mention of alternatives such as start_live for restarting or live_status for checking state. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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