voltage_stop

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, and the description adds concrete behavior: releases every held key/button and interrupts bursts. This goes beyond the annotation's generic destroy flag without contradicting it, giving the agent a more precise model of consequences.

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 concise sentences convey the purpose, safety, and edge-case behavior with zero filler. Information is front-loaded and every clause 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?

For a simple stop tool, the description covers the main behavior and safety profile. However, the lack of any parameter explanation means an agent might guess wrong about 'run_id' or 'reason' (e.g., whether run_id is required to target a specific run). Optional parameters with defaults mitigate, but the gap prevents full completeness.

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 does not explain either 'reason' or 'run_id.' The agent has no guidance on what these parameters control or when to provide them, though they are optional. With no parameter documentation anywhere, this is a notable gap.

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 states a specific verb ('Stop') and resource ('a run') while adding unique scope: 'release every held key and button.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like voltage_pause and voltage_run, and the mention of interrupting mid-flight bursts further clarifies its specific role.

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 provides clear context: 'Safe to call at any time' and explicitly covers the edge case of a mid-flight burst. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like voltage_pause or voltage_steer, leaving some ambiguity about when to choose this over a pause or a graceful stop.

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