stop_simulation

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and succeeds: it discloses that the stop is destructive to current simulation state by resetting articulations and rigid bodies to the pose captured at first Play. The 'like the Isaac UI Stop button' analogy gives a concrete behavioral reference.

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?

Two tightly written sentences lead with the core action and then add the reset detail and usage reason. No filler or repetition.

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 stop/reset command with an output schema and no annotations, the description covers what it does, what state it returns to, and when to invoke it. Nothing essential for invoking it correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description adds no meaning to the two optional parameters, command_id and idempotency_key. The names and default null are self-explanatory, but the tool description does not compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Stop the physics simulation and reset to spawn state.' It further clarifies by stating articulations and rigid bodies are reset to their spawn pose, and compares it to the Isaac UI Stop button, which differentiates it from sibling pause_simulation.

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?

It provides a clear usage context: 'Call this to return the scene to a clean starting point before another run.' It does not explicitly name alternatives such as pause_simulation or state when not to use it, so it falls short of full when/when-not guidance.

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