lol_wamp_record_stopClose the recorder socket to stop capturing League of Legends client events; the recorded timeline stays readable for later review.
Close the recorder socket. The recorded timeline stays readable with lol_wamp_record_dump.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and it does disclose one important trait: the recorded timeline persists and stays readable afterward, so stopping is non-destructive. It omits other behaviors that matter for a state-mutating call, such as whether it errors when no recorder is active or whether it flushes buffered data.
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 sentences, zero filler, and the core action is front-loaded ahead of the follow-up pointer to the dump tool.
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 no-parameter, no-output-schema toggle, the description covers the essential agent concern: that stopping doesn't lose the recording. It leaves only minor gaps around error/prerequisite conditions.
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 nothing for the description to clarify beyond the schema's empty object.
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 verb+resource are concrete: 'Close the recorder socket' maps unambiguously to stopping capture, and the reference to lol_wamp_record_dump distinguishes it from the sibling that reads the timeline. It never explicitly says it halts LCU WAMP traffic capture (that comes from the name/title), so it stops just short of a 5.
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 routes the agent to lol_wamp_record_dump for reading recorded data, which is useful implied guidance, but it never states when this tool should be used (e.g., after lol_wamp_record_start) or what happens if nothing is recording. Usage is implied rather than spelled out.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.