Stop buffering LCU events

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the 'Idempotent; safe to call when already stopped' line largely repeats structured data. However, the description adds genuinely non-annotated behavior: buffered events remain readable via lol_events_poll after stopping, which tells the agent nothing is lost.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then usage, then the alternative, then the behavior note. Slightly padded by restating the idempotency annotation, but otherwise every sentence earns its place.

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?

A zero-parameter, non-destructive stop tool with no output schema needs only to say what it stops, when to use it, and what happens to buffered data — all of which are covered. Nothing an agent needs to call 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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is no parameter semantics to document and the schema is complete by construction.

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 and resource ('Close the League Client WebSocket event tap and stop buffering live events'), and explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling lol_wamp_record_stop. An agent can tell exactly what this does without opening a schema.

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?

Gives the use condition ('pause or end event collection and conserve memory') and routes the agent to the correct sibling for the adjacent task ('For stopping WAMP recording, use lol_wamp_record_stop instead'). Nothing is left to inference.

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