Stop remote climate

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

Annotations already cover read-only/write/destructive/idempotent status. The description adds transparency beyond annotations by noting the stop command is followed by a verification against the reported climate state, and that confirm=false previews instead of sending. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two short sentences front-load the core action, then give the essential safety guard. No filler or redundancy.

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 one-optional-parameter command with rich annotations and an output schema, the description is complete: it covers what happens, the verification behavior, and when it should be invoked. There is no missing information an agent would need to call it correctly.

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% and the confirm parameter is fully explained in the schema. The description's mention of preview with confirm=false reinforces that semantics but adds no new parameter meaning beyond the baseline.

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 uses a specific verb ('Stop') and resource ('remote pre-conditioning'), and adds a verification step that clarifies its effect. This distinguishes it immediately from siblings like toyota_start_climate and toyota_get_climate.

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 states an explicit condition—only when the user explicitly asked—and gives a concrete fallback: preview with confirm=false when in doubt. This is clear when-to-use guidance that reduces the risk of unintended commands.

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