terminal_stop

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose a genuine behavioral trait: force kills the whole process tree rather than requesting a graceful stop. However, it omits the consequences of a non-forced close, error behavior for unknown sessions, and whether the call blocks.

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 purpose is front-loaded in one sentence, followed by a compact args block. Nothing is padded, though the args header formatting is slightly heavier than the content warrants.

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 two-parameter stop tool with no annotations and no output schema, this covers the essentials but leaves gaps: no relationship to terminal_interrupt, no statement of what happens to the session's output or files, and no failure semantics. Adequate but not complete for a destructive operation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: session_id is tied back to terminal_start, and force is explained as graceful-stop vs process-tree-kill. Both parameters gain meaning the schema alone does not provide.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'Close a session and free its process.' This is clear and concrete, but it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like terminal_interrupt, which an agent might reasonably confuse with stopping a session.

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 when-to-use guidance or statement of alternatives. The sibling set contains terminal_interrupt, and an agent gets no help deciding between an interrupt and a full stop. The force note explains a parameter choice, not when to reach for this tool.

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