pscribe_stop

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear the full burden. It discloses the action and the return value, but leaves ambiguity about whether 'pause' implies resumability, whether the operation is idempotent, and what happens if no session is active. This is a moderate gap in behavioral detail.

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 two short sentences that immediately state the action and the return value. There is no redundant or filler content; every word earns its place.

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 (no parameters, no output schema), the description covers the basic action and return. However, it lacks edge-case details such as behavior with no active session, possible error conditions, or the distinction between a resumable pause and a permanent stop. These omissions make it minimally 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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema is an empty object. With no parameters to document, the baseline of 4 applies. The description adds no parameter-specific information, but none is needed.

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 action: 'Stop (pause) the current transcription session.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the mention of returning a status message further clarifies its purpose. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pscribe_start and pscribe_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?

The description clearly implies when to use the tool: when you want to stop or pause the current transcription session. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is unambiguous for a simple stop operation.

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