codebase_stop

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses key behaviors: graceful stop, batch finishes and checkpoints, progress preserved. This gives adequate transparency for understanding the tool's effects.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. First sentence states purpose, second adds behavioral detail and next step. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

For a simple stop tool with one optional param and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior (graceful stop, checkpoint, resume). Could mention behavior when no indexing is running, but not critical.

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 has 100% coverage with one parameter described. The description does not add any information about the param (projectPath) beyond what schema provides, so baseline score 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?

Description clearly states it stops an indexing operation, uses specific verb 'stop' and resource 'indexing operation', and distinguishes from sibling like codebase_index (which starts indexing). The mention of graceful stop and checkpoint adds clarity.

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?

Explicitly says to stop an in-progress indexing operation and suggests re-running codebase_index to resume. Does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives for other scenarios, but the context is clear.

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