stop_print

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly discloses the critical irreversible consequence of the action, which is the most important behavioral trait. It does not describe what happens to the print job or printer state beyond cancellation, but the key danger is explicitly surfaced.

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?

One concise, front-loaded sentence states the action and scope, followed by a short warning. No filler or repetition; every part 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 one-parameter, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description plus schema covers invocation and the main irreversible consequence. However, the absence of explicit guidance toward the safer pause_print alternative creates a meaningful context gap for an AI agent selecting between similar tools.

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 already 100%, documenting the printer parameter including 'all' and omit behavior. The description reinforces the 'all printers' option but adds little semantic value beyond what the schema already states.

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 verb, 'stop/cancel', a clear resource, 'the current print on a printer (or all printers)', and the explicit warning differentiates it from pause-like operations. This is immediately distinguishable from siblings such as pause_print and resume_print.

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 implies when to use it: when you need to cancel or stop a print. The 'cannot be undone' warning obliquely suggests it should not be used if resumption is desired, but it never explicitly names pause_print as the safe alternative or states when-not-to-use conditions.

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