siren_stop

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It explicitly warns 'WARNING: physical action', states that confirm must be true, and mentions the governing environment variable UNIFI_PROTECT_MUTATIONS_ENABLED. This discloses the mutating physical nature and safety gating beyond the bare schema.

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?

Three compact lines: purpose with warning, endpoint, then parameter notes. Every line earns its place, and the critical warning is front-loaded.

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 3-parameter mutation tool with an output schema present, the description covers the warning, execution prerequisite, param sourcing, and safety gating. No essential operational detail is missing.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters itself. It does so well: host format (console name, ID, or composite ID MAC:numericId), siren_id source and requirement, and the confirm boolean's role and gating. This adds meaning the schema does not provide.

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-resource pair, 'Stop a sounding siren', and gives the exact REST endpoint. It clearly distinguishes this from siblings like siren_play and siren_test_sound by stating the action is stopping an active siren.

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?

It tells the agent how to obtain siren_id from list_sirens and that confirm must be true, which is actionable guidance. It does not explicitly list when not to use this tool versus update_siren or siren_test_sound, but the purpose is clear enough that an agent can route correctly.

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