stop_clip

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

The annotations already disclose the safety profile (non-destructive, not read-only, not idempotent). The description adds a useful behavioral detail beyond annotations: quantized=False causes an immediate stop rather than a quantized stop. It does not, however, disclose side effects or response behavior.

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?

It is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The parenthetical clarifying quantized=False earns its place by adding behavioral meaning.

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 two-parameter tool, the core action and the quantized behavior are covered, and annotations handle safety. However, the required track parameter has no description in either the schema or the tool description, and there is no output schema to clarify what stopping returns.

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%. The description explains the quantized parameter's immediate-stop behavior, but the required 'track' parameter is entirely undocumented. With low schema coverage, the description falls short of compensating for both parameters.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'Stop the playing or triggered Session clips on a track.' This clearly separates it from siblings like fire_clip (which starts clips) and delete_clip (which removes clips), even without naming them explicitly.

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 parenthetical 'quantized=False stops immediately' gives some usage context, but the description does not explain when to choose stop_clip over fire_clip, delete_clip, or clip_action. Usage is implied rather than guided.

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