remote_spy_stop

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the core action and omits what happens to captured logs, whether the operation is reversible, and whether it affects any active spy session. This lack of detail could leave an agent uncertain about side effects.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and is appropriately sized for a tool with no parameters.

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?

The description is minimally adequate for a simple zero-parameter stop action, but it lacks lifecycle context (e.g., what a session is, whether logs persist, or when it should be called). Given the sibling tool named remote_spy_start, the role is inferable, but the description itself is somewhat sparse.

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 tool takes zero parameters, and the schema already reflects this with 100% coverage. No additional parameter documentation is needed, so the baseline score of 4 applies.

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 'Stop logging remote traffic' clearly states the action (stop) and the resource (remote traffic logging). It distinguishes itself from siblings like remote_spy_start and remote_spy_dump by explicitly using 'Stop' as the verb.

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 timing is only implied by the tool's name and its sibling tools (remote_spy_start, remote_spy_dump). The description does not explicitly say 'use after remote_spy_start' or mention any prerequisites or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer the lifecycle.

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