Stream End

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that omitting venues stops all venues, that the encoder stops with the last one, and that chat remains connected, but it does not cover permissions, failure modes, or what the stream state becomes afterward.

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 efficient sentence with the core action front-loaded and no wasted wording. Parenthetical defaults and side effects are compactly included.

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?

For a simple one-parameter stop tool with an output schema present, the description covers purpose, default scope, and a key side effect. Remaining gaps are mostly around venue identifier format and explicit sibling differentiation, which are secondary for this simple operation.

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 compensate for the single 'venues' parameter. It adds that the default is all venues and describes multi-venue stopping behavior, but it does not define the expected venue identifier format or array item semantics.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Stop streaming to these venues', with a default scope of all venues. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the close sibling stream_stop or other stop-like streaming tools.

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 the direct action and the default-all note, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use stream_end versus stream_stop, stream_start, or live_stop. The agent must infer the correct context from the sibling list.

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