Stop preview

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it stops a running preview, which is essentially the tool's name restated. It does not mention side effects, what happens if no preview is running, whether it is reversible, or any error conditions—information an agent might need.

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 concise sentence with no unnecessary words. It is well front-loaded, stating the action immediately. However, its brevity borders on under-specification, which is a trade-off, but it earns points for efficiency.

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 tool with a required parameter, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is severely incomplete. It does not describe the parameter, any prerequisites, expected outcomes, or edge cases. An agent would have to guess how to call it correctly, making it inadequate for autonomous use.

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 schema includes a required 'app' string parameter, but the description provides zero explanation of what 'app' represents, how it should be formatted, or where to obtain it. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description fails to compensate, leaving the agent completely uninformed about the parameter.

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 clearly states the action (stop) and the resource (preview), and adds the condition 'running' which distinguishes it from merely starting or viewing a preview. It differentiates from siblings like start_preview by implying the complementary action, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 when a preview is running, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, when not to use it, or any prerequisites. The sibling list suggests start_preview is the obvious pair, but the description itself does not reference it.

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