Stop execution

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

The description adds 'exact confirmation' as a behavioral guard beyond annotations (destructiveHint=true). However, it does not detail what happens after stopping (e.g., irreversibility) or how confirmation is compared. Annotations already cover the destructive nature, so the description provides modest added context.

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 sentence front-loaded with key information (verb, resource, condition). Every word is functional, though it could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.

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?

Given a destructive operation with two required parameters and an output schema, the description is too sparse. It omits return value behavior, error handling, and the exact format of the confirmation guard, leaving the agent with incomplete context.

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 50% (confirmation has description, executionId does not). The description does not compensate: it mentions 'running execution' and 'exact confirmation' but fails to explain what executionId represents or how to obtain it, leaving a gap for the agent.

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 uses specific verb 'stop' and resource 'execution', clearly distinguishing from siblings like 'n8n_executions_delete' which deletes an execution rather than stopping a running one. The phrase 'one running execution' further clarifies scope.

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 states 'after exact confirmation', indicating the prerequisite of having an execution ID and being certain. It implicitly distinguishes from non-running executions, but does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternative tools like 'n8n_executions_delete'.

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