stop

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the behavioral effect ('freezes the waveform on screen') and the state change (stopping acquisition). However, it does not specify idempotency, side effects (e.g., whether the acquisition resumes later), or error conditions if already stopped. These omissions are minor for a simple tool.

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?

A single sentence of ten words, front-loaded with the action and result, with no filler. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity and makes efficient use of the description space.

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 the tool's trivial nature (no parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description provides the essential information: what it does and the observable effect. There is no additional context the agent would need to invoke it correctly, aside from the usage ambiguity already noted, which is covered under usage guidelines.

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 has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% (none to describe). The baseline for 0 params is 4; the description correctly avoids adding any parameter-related noise. No compensation is needed.

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 ('waveform acquisition') and clarifies the result ('freezes the waveform on screen'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like 'run' and 'single'—an agent can infer its core function without ambiguity.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies stopping an ongoing acquisition, but it does not mention that 'single' also halts after one trigger, which could lead to confusion. There is no contrast with siblings or mention of prerequisites like needing an active run.

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