trace.stop

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

With no annotations and a one-word description, the tool's behavior is entirely opaque. The description fails to disclose what 'stopping a trace' entails, such as whether it terminates a session, cleans up resources, or requires active traces.

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 short, but this is under-specification rather than deliberate conciseness. It contains a single word that adds no informational value, so it fails the 'every sentence earns its place' test.

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 has two required parameters and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It provides no context about the tool's purpose, usage, parameters, or expected behavior, making it impossible for an agent to use it correctly.

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 schema lists handle and session as required strings, but the description provides no explanation of what these parameters mean or how they relate to the trace. With 0% schema description coverage and no supplementary description, the agent is left without semantic information.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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?

There is no guidance whatsoever about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess when trace.stop is appropriate.

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