pie_stop_session

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden; it adds that the call is a request, that wait_seconds delays state reporting, and that a JSON string with prior/current PIE state is returned. However, it does not disclose side effects of stopping the session or failure behavior when no active session exists.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and organized into compact Args, Returns, KB, and Example sections. Every section contributes useful information with no filler.

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 tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description covers the call signature, return value, and a KB pointer. It is slightly abbreviated on side effects and when a stop is appropriate, but nothing essential to invoking it 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?

The schema only provides type, title, and default for wait_seconds; the description explains its purpose as a short post-request delay before reporting session state. This adds meaningful behavioral context that the schema lacks.

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?

States a specific action and resource: requesting the active PIE/SIE session to stop. This clearly differentiates it from sibling session tools like pie_launch_session, pie_simulate_input, and pie_capture_log.

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 phrase 'active PIE/SIE session' implies the tool only applies when a session is already running, but the description does not explicitly say when to use it or name alternatives such as pie_launch_session. No exclusion criteria or fallback behavior is given.

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