stop_preview

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the mutation effect (stopping a preview) but omits details like error handling (e.g., if no preview is playing) or side effects. The behavior is adequately transparent for a simple stop action.

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, concise sentence with no filler. Every word is necessary and directly states the tool's action.

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 stop action with no output schema or annotations, the description is nearly sufficient. It could mention prerequisites (e.g., a preview must be playing) or error states, but the current description covers the essential functionality.

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 only parameter 'ctx' is an internal context object, not user-visible. The schema provides a detailed description of the context, but the tool description adds no parameter information. Since there are no user-facing parameters, the baseline score of 4 applies, and the description does not need to add further meaning.

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' and the resource 'browser preview', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'preview_browser_item' by being its direct counterpart.

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?

The description communicates when to use the tool ('stop any currently playing browser preview'), which is clear. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternative tools, though the context implies it.

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