stop_audio_capture

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

The description discloses the main action and return values, which is helpful since no annotations are provided. However, it does not mention potential side effects, such as overwriting existing files, or prerequisites (e.g., an ongoing capture). The behavioral transparency is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two sentences that front-load the action and succinctly state return values. Every word contributes meaning without 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 low complexity and the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description covers the core action and return values. However, it omits details about parameters and potential errors, leaving some gaps. It is minimally complete but could be improved.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain any of the parameters (output_path, sample_rate). While parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, the description fails to add meaning or usage hints, leaving the agent without guidance on how to specify output location or sample rate.

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 audio capture') and the outcome ('save to WAV file'), and it lists the return values (RMS level, peak amplitude, duration). This effectively distinguishes it from siblings like start_audio_capture.

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 versus alternatives. It does not mention that it should be used after start_audio_capture or that it requires an active capture session. The agent is left to infer usage context.

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