set_stop_time

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and largely fails it: it does not say whether the value is absolute simulation time or duration, whether it affects an in-progress run, or whether the setting is reversible. Only the unit (seconds) is conveyed, which the schema already provides.

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 a single short sentence with no wasted words, so it is concise and front-loaded. That brevity comes at the cost of under-specification rather than being efficiently informative.

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 mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description should explain what the stop time governs and any preconditions. It instead gives only the unit, leaving the agent unable to call it confidently without guessing at semantics.

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 100% and the single parameter (seconds) is documented with an example (39600), so the baseline is 3. The description adds nothing beyond repeating the seconds unit already present in the schema.

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 and resource (set the model's stop time in seconds), which is clearer than a bare name restatement. However, it does not differentiate this tool from related siblings such as set_run_speed or set_datetime, so an agent cannot tell from the text alone which timing control to pick.

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?

There is no indication of when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g., whether a model must be open or a run selected), and no mention of what happens if the stop time is before the current time. Usage is left entirely to inference.

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