stop_ir_evading

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

With no annotations and no behavioral details, the description fails to disclose any side effects, preconditions, or implications of stopping IR evading. It is a bare command with zero transparency.

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 but under-specified, lacking sufficient information to be useful. It is not appropriately sized for the agent's needs, similar to a placeholder.

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 absence of annotations and minimal description, the tool's purpose and context are not fully explained. Even though an output schema exists, the description doesn't clarify the action or distinguish it from related tools.

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, so the schema fully covers them. Although the description adds no parameter details, none are needed; baseline 4 applies.

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 'Stop IR evading behavior' restates the tool name without elaboration, making it a tautology. It doesn't clarify what 'IR evading' is or distinguish it from sibling tools like stop_ir_following.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool, such as after starting IR evading or as opposed to other stop commands. The description offers no context or alternatives.

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