Stop Stopwatch

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Stop the stopwatch,' but does not reveal side effects, idempotency, whether a stopwatch must be running, or what happens to elapsed time. For a state-changing operation, this is a significant gap.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is concise and to the point, though it sacrifices useful detail for brevity.

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?

Despite low complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description does not fully enable correct invocation: the meaning of 'id' is only implied, and the behavioral effects of stopping the stopwatch are undisclosed. An agent would likely still be uncertain about prerequisites and side effects.

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?

The input schema provides only a required string 'id' with 0% semantic coverage, so the description must compensate. Saying 'on a card' suggests that 'id' refers to a card, but this is not explicitly stated; the description leaves the parameter meaning inferable rather than definitive.

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 action ('Stop') and a clear resource ('the stopwatch on a card'), which is more informative than the title alone. It is not explicitly differentiated from sibling stopwatch tools, but the verb 'Stop' makes its core purpose immediately recognizable.

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 phrase 'on a card' gives useful context about what entity the tool operates on, implying it should be used when you need to stop a card's stopwatch. However, it does not explicitly describe when to use this instead of start_stopwatch, get_stopwatch, or reset_stopwatch, leaving alternatives unaddressed.

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