stop_screen_record

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

The description reveals that the tool not only stops recording but also finalizes the mp4 and pulls it to a local path, which is useful behavioral context beyond a simple 'stop' command. However, with no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It does not disclose whether the recording is deleted from the device, what happens if no recording is active, or if the operation is idempotent.

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 sentence of 15 words, efficiently conveying the three-step process. It is front-loaded with the action and contains no extraneous information.

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 tool with two parameters and a straightforward operation, the description covers the main actions. However, it lacks details about error conditions (e.g., no active recording), return value (no output schema), and behavior when the local path already exists. While acceptable for a simple tool, it could be more complete.

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%, so the input schema already documents both parameters and their meanings. The description adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema provides; it only echoes the purpose of 'local_path' (saving the pulled mp4). Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specific actions: stop the screen recording, finalize the mp4, and pull it to a local path. It uses a specific verb-resource combination ('stop screen recording') and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'start_screen_record' and 'pull_file' by describing the complete workflow.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool, when not to use it, or alternatives. While it is complementary to 'start_screen_record', there is no explicit mention of prerequisites (e.g., an active recording must exist) or when to use other tools like 'pull_file' instead.

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