n8n_stop

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the core action (stopping the n8n process) and scopes it to the process started by n8n_start, but it does not disclose details such as whether the stop is graceful, what happens if the process is not running, or any side effects. This is acceptable but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. Every word earns its place, and it communicates the purpose and scope efficiently. It is model 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 the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is largely complete. It explains what it does and when to use it. The only minor gap is lack of information about edge cases (e.g., already stopped), but this is not critical for a stop tool. Overall, it is adequate for the task.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds relevant context by specifying the exact process scope ('iniciado por n8n_start'), which is useful even though there are no parameters to document. No extra parameter explanation 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 clearly states the action ('Detiene' = stops) and the resource ('el proceso de n8n'), and specifically distinguishes itself from the sibling n8n_start by referencing the process it manages. This is a specific verb+resource pair that is not ambiguous.

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 phrase 'iniciado por n8n_start' provides clear usage context, indicating the tool should be used after n8n_start. It does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, but the pairing with n8n_start is a clear enough guideline for this simple tool.

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