stop_share

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

The description discloses key behaviors: it clears the serve/funnel configuration, distinguishes between HTTPS port (as shown in share_status) and the local proxied port, and states the effect of omitting the argument. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, which it does adequately.

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 concise at two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and contains no redundant information. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides complete guidance on both usage modes and the nature of the parameter. No gaps remain.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that 'httpsPort' is the HTTPS serve port (not the local port) and specifying the effect of omitting it. This clarifies the parameter's purpose and behavior.

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 tool's purpose: to stop sharing. It distinguishes between two modes (clearing all or turning off a specific HTTPS endpoint), and the context of siblings like 'share_port' and 'share_status' makes it evident that this is the stopping counterpart.

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 explains when to use each mode: without arguments to clear all, with httpsPort to stop a specific endpoint. It implicitly references 'share_status' for the correct port, providing a hint for use. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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