task_kill

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden; it discloses that the tool does not remove logs/exits or stop tunnel, which are important behavioral traits, but omits other aspects like required permissions, reversibility, or error handling.

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?

Single sentence is concise and front-loaded with the key action, but slightly too brief given the lack of parameter descriptions.

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 no annotations, a having an output schema, and parameter descriptions missing, the description is incomplete; it covers main purpose and exclusions but lacks details on parameters and return behavior.

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 has 0% description coverage and description provides no additional meaning for parameters 'target' and 'task_name', leaving ambiguity especially for 'target'.

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 specific verb 'terminates' and resource 'active tmux session for a task', and clearly states what it does NOT do (remove logs/exits or stop tunnel), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like task_start, task_status, tunnel_start, tunnel_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?

Implicitly suggests when not to use (by stating what it doesn't do), but lacks explicit alternatives or conditions for when to prefer this tool over others like tunnel_stop or task_status.

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