halt

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states the basic action and return value but does not disclose side effects, safety (e.g., whether it is reversible), or requirements (e.g., target must be running).

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 extremely concise: two sentences with no redundant words. Every sentence provides essential information about action and return.

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?

While the tool is simple and has an output schema (returns CPU state), the description lacks context such as preconditions (e.g., target must be connected and running) or mention of side effects (e.g., breakpoints retained). It is adequate but not comprehensive given no annotations.

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?

There are no parameters (schema coverage 100%), so baseline is 4. The description does not add parameter information, but no such information is needed.

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 states a clear verb-resource pair: 'Stop (break) program execution on the target.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'go' (resume) and 'step' (single step), making its purpose unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to halt vs. using breakpoints or other stop mechanisms. No context about prerequisites or when not to use is given.

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