Stop Eden

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the description adds some value by scoping the operation to the process started by this MCP server. However, it does not disclose side effects, relationship to sessions, or what happens to active processes.

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 eight-word sentence that is front-loaded and contains no filler. It is appropriately concise for a straightforward stop action.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description lacks critical context for a destructive operation: what exactly is terminated, whether session_id narrows the scope, and what the expected outcome is. Sibling tools indicate related cleanup operations, but the description does not clarify the boundaries.

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 0%, and the description does not mention session_id or explain its meaning. With an optional parameter, the description should clarify whether and how it modifies the stop behavior, but it offers no such information.

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 clearly states the action ('Stop') and the specific resource ('the Eden process started by this MCP server'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like eden_stop_session by explicitly targeting the process, not a session.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like eden_stop_session or eden_cleanup_sessions. The description implies usage but does not explain contexts, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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