Stop channel

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

The description adds specific behavioral detail beyond the annotations: it clears all waveform tasks and resets intensity exactly to 0 for one channel. The destructiveHint and readOnlyHint annotations are consistent with this behavior, and the description clarifies the exact scope of the destructive 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 sentence that immediately states the two effects: clearing waveform tasks and resetting intensity. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 tool is well covered by a rich annotation set, a 100% documented schema, and a concise accurate description. The main gap is the lack of explicit relationship to emergency_stop or other stopping alternatives, but for basic selection and invocation the definition is largely sufficient.

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 coverage is 100%, so all three parameters are already documented with clear descriptions and an enum for channel. The description adds no substantial parameter-level meaning, such as how slotId or clientId affect routing, 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 states a specific verb and resource: clear all waveform tasks and reset the intensity of one channel to 0. This clearly distinguishes it from intensity-setting tools and general status tools, though it could be more explicit about how it differs from emergency_stop.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as dglab_emergency_stop or dglab_set_intensity. The intended use is only implied by the action described, with no explicit context or exclusions.

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