jev_stop_live

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden, and it does disclose the main effects: it stops file watching and closes the headless browser, while explicitly noting that Figma layers are preserved. It does not mention idempotency, auth requirements, or what happens if no live session is active, so full transparency is lacking.

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 focused sentence with the main action front-loaded and a useful clarification about Figma layers. Every phrase earns its place, with no wasted words.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema stop command, the description tells the agent what will stop and what will be preserved, which is the key context needed to decide to call it. It could add a note about whether calling it when no session is running is safe, but the core use case is covered.

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 has zero parameters, so the schema already fully covers parameter semantics; the 0-parameter baseline of 4 applies. The description appropriately adds no parameter details because there are none to document.

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 names a specific action ('stop the live session') and immediately specifies what that entails: stop watching files and close the headless browser. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like jev_sync_now or jev_status, which are not stop operations.

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 intended use is clear: call this when the live session should be ended, since the description defines the live session's active behavior as watching files and running a headless browser. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, but no other sibling tool performs this stop function.

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