stop_recording

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that stopping also starts transcription and that the result depends on wait_seconds, but it omits permission requirements, behavior when no recording is in progress, and whether the stop action is irreversible.

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 short and front-loads the main action before parameter notes. The parameter section is somewhat terse and fragmentary, but it does not waste much space.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value details are not fully required in the description. Still, for a mutation tool with no annotations and four undocumented schema parameters, the description should say more about transcribe semantics and edge cases such as stopping when no recording is active.

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 0%, so the description must explain all four parameters. It covers speakers and language and refers to wait_seconds indirectly, but it never explains the transcribe boolean, leaving a meaningful parameter undocumented.

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 a specific verb and resource: "Stop the recording in progress and start its transcription." That is enough for an agent to understand the operation, but it does not explicitly distinguish this tool from related siblings such as recording_status or transcribe_recording.

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?

Usage is implied by "recording in progress" and the fallback instruction to call get_transcript later, plus a note to ask the user for group-call speaker count. However, it does not explicitly say when to use stop_recording versus recording_status, start_recording, or transcribe_recording, nor does it give clear exclusions.

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