stop_recording

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

The annotations already indicate this is not read-only (readOnlyHint=false) and has open world effects (openWorldHint=true). The description adds the implementation method 'killall', which hints at forceful termination, but it doesn't disclose what happens if no recording is active, whether the recording file is saved, or any side effects. With annotations present, the description adds minimal extra behavioral context.

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, concise sentence that states the action and method. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or redundancy.

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 is largely complete. It could mention behavior when no recording is in progress (e.g., no-op or error), but for a basic stop action, the current text suffices. A 5 would require that extra edge-case context.

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 coverage is 100% (trivially). The description correctly doesn't attempt to explain parameters. With 0 params, the baseline is 4, and there is no gap to compensate for.

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 uses a specific verb ('Stops') and a clear resource ('the simulator video recording'), which directly distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'record_video' that starts recording. It also includes the implementation detail 'using killall', making the action unambiguous.

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?

While the description doesn't explicitly mention when to use this tool or list alternatives, the context is clear: it complements 'record_video' and is specific to simulator video recording. The absence of an explicit exclusion (e.g., 'only when recording is active') prevents a 5, but the purpose is self-evident.

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