Stop screen recording (verified)

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the stop is 'graceful' and that verification occurs (recorder exited, MP4 exists), which gives some insight into side effects and success criteria. However, it omits error handling, what happens if no recording is active, or potential return values.

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?

A single efficient sentence that explicitly states the action and the verification steps. No filler, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 no-parameter tool without an output schema, the description is reasonably complete: it states the action and intended postconditions. It does not describe return values or error scenarios, but these are not strictly necessary given the simplicity.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100% (vacuously). Per the rubric, 0 params sets a baseline of 4. The description does not need to explain 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 states a specific verb ('stop') and resource ('active recording') and includes secondary verification ('verify that the recorder exited and its MP4 exists'), which clearly differentiates from siblings like screenrecording_start and screenrecording_status.

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?

It implies usage (stop an active recording) but does not explicitly say when to use versus alternatives, nor mention prerequisites like 'only when a recording is active' or reference the companion start tool. The purpose is clear enough but guidance on context is missing.

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