Stop recording

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It hints at a return value ("recorded entries") but says nothing about error behavior when no recording is in progress, whether the recording session is cleared, whether the target must match the one passed to record_start, or any permission requirements.

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?

A single short sentence with the action front-loaded and no wasted words. It is tight, though its brevity is partly a result of under-specification rather than deliberate economy.

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 zero-required-param stop tool with no output schema and no annotations, the definition is minimally adequate: the action and a rough sense of the return are conveyed. It omits the recording lifecycle context (matching target, no-active-recording behavior) that an agent would need to call it reliably.

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 100% and the single nested target object is already documented in the schema as the unified device target, so the description adds nothing beyond it. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 recording") and adds the outcome ("return the recorded entries"), so the agent knows what it does without opening the schema. It doesn't explicitly name or distinguish itself from siblings like computer_record_to_script, so it stops short of a 5.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of pairing with computer_record_start, and no statement about what happens if no recording is active. The agent must infer the lifecycle from the sibling names alone.

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