micropython_interrupt

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the mechanism (sending Ctrl-C) and the expected effect (interrupting processing), which is useful behavioral context. However, it doesn't state whether the interruption is graceful, whether state is preserved, what happens if no process is running, or what the output contains. Some behavioral transparency is present but significant gaps remain.

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, compact sentence that is front-loaded with the core action. No unnecessary words or structure.

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?

The tool is simple (no parameters, output schema exists), so the description doesn't need to explain return values. However, for an interrupt operation with no annotations, more context about behavior (e.g., what gets interrupted, whether it's safe, effects on connection state) would help an agent use it correctly. The description is adequate but leaves notable gaps.

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 takes zero parameters, so parameter semantics are not applicable. Baseline 4 is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

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 (send Ctrl-C) and its effect (interrupt running processing). An agent can distinguish this from siblings like micropython_reset or micropython_disconnect, though the description could more explicitly differentiate from reset (soft interrupt vs hard reset).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like micropython_reset or micropython_disconnect. The description implies it stops a running process but doesn't say when this is preferable to a full reset. No exclusions or prerequisites are provided.

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