⚠️ Target action: stop

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

The description fully discloses the destructive nature (removes bids, resets settings) and ongoing cost (base price charged). This aligns with annotations (destructiveHint: true, readOnlyHint: false) and adds valuable context about exactly what is reset and that the listing continues to be charged.

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 three efficient sentences: statement of action, warning with alternatives, and output/limit note. No extraneous words, front-loaded with purpose.

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?

Given no output schema, the description explains the return value (text message) and covers key aspects (effect, limit, warning). It is sufficient for a straightforward action tool.

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 coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for all three parameters. The tool description does not add further meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb 'STOPS' and the resource 'target-action promotion for a listing', and explains the effect (switches to base price). It distinguishes from sibling tools like `cpa_target_save_manual_bid` and `cpa_target_save_auto_bid` which are mentioned as ways to resume promotion.

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 warns that calling this tool resets bids and provides alternatives for resuming. It also notes the rate limit. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when not to use it), but the context is clear.

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