screen-recording-stop

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly. It discloses the stop-and-finalize mechanism, behavior after early termination, return field semantics, foldable-simulator panel handling, trimming effects, and failure conditions. This is exemplary transparency beyond what any schema would convey.

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 front-loaded with the core action, then systematically covers edge cases, return format, and failure modes. Every sentence carries useful information, and despite the length, no sentence is filler. It is well-structured for the complexity of the tool.

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 there is no output schema, the description fully documents the return object and its fields, including optional fields and their meanings. It also covers failure conditions and device-specific behavior. For a one-parameter tool with complex semantics, the description is complete.

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% for the only parameter 'udid', which the schema already documents as the target device id. The description adds no extra meaning about the parameter beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Stop the screen recording started by `screen-recording-start` and retrieve the video.' It clearly identifies the tool's paired lifecycle role and distinguishes it from its start counterpart, so an agent knows exactly what operation this performs.

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 gives explicit usage context: 'Use when the interaction being captured is finished, or a tool-result note reminds you a recording is still running.' It also explains that the tool works even after the recording self-terminated, which is critical for agents. It does not explicitly say when not to use it, but the start/stop pairing makes the alternative obvious.

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