terminate_agent

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden for a clearly destructive operation. It says nothing about irreversibility, what happens to in-flight work or conversation state, whether termination is graceful, or what error surfaces for an unknown or already-dead agent_id.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient, though the brevity contributes to the missing behavioral detail rather than being a virtue in itself.

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 structurally simple (one param, no nested objects, no output schema), but it is a destructive mutation with zero annotation coverage, and the description supplies none of the safety, effect, or return-value context an agent needs before killing an interactive worker.

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% and there is a single required agent_id whose meaning is already spelled out in the schema. The description adds no format, sourcing, or lookup guidance (e.g., where to obtain the ID) beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

"Terminate a spawned interactive agent" gives a specific verb (terminate) and resource (spawned interactive agent), and the word "spawned" ties it to spawn_agent rather than to a session. It stops short of distinguishing it explicitly from nearby siblings such as terminate_session or kill_all_sessions.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this instead of terminate_session, kill_all_sessions, or pause_session, and no prerequisites (e.g., the agent must be idle or is it a hard kill?). The only hint is the word "spawned," which is not enough to route an agent reliably between 21 sibling tools.

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