uipath_stop_job

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only states the basic action. It does not explain side effects, permissions required, behavior when the job is already stopped, or the distinction between soft stop and force (which is only hinted at by the 'force' parameter description in the schema).

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, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. No unnecessary words 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 relatively simple control action, the description is minimally sufficient, but it lacks context about the effects of the 'force' parameter, the need for folderId in some deployments, and the expected state changes. With no output schema and no annotations, the description could be more complete, but the schema covers parameter semantics.

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%, so the parameters are well-documented. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, but the schema itself provides adequate clarity for jobId, force, and folderId. Baseline score 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 "Stop a running job in UiPath Orchestrator" uses a specific verb (stop) and resource (running job), clearly conveying the tool's function. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like uipath_start_job, but the action is unambiguous and distinct.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention scenarios where a soft stop vs force stop is appropriate, nor does it reference the sibling uipath_start_job for context. Usage context is entirely implicit.

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