Stop Search

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true, which the description doesn't contradict. The description adds that the tool stops a running search, which aligns with annotations. No annotation contradiction; description is consistent and provides necessary behavioral context.

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 concise, with a clear action statement and a Args section. It is front-loaded and uses minimal words, though the Args formatting could be more compact.

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 the tool's simplicity (one required param, no output schema), the description is complete enough. It explains the action and the argument, but could mention idempotency or effects of stopping a search that is not running.

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 has 100% coverage with description 'Search ID' for search_id, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but that's acceptable given full schema coverage.

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 'a running background search'. It is distinct from siblings like fc_start_search and fc_clear_search, though it could explicitly mention the relation to these siblings.

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 usage when a search is running, but does not provide when-not-to-use or alternative tools. It lacks context like what happens if search_id is invalid or already stopped.

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