stop-precheck

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for transparency. It only states the action without disclosing behaviors like what happens if no precheck is running, whether the stop is immediate or graceful, or how it affects subsequent status checks.

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 concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. No wasted words or redundant information.

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 low complexity (no params, no output schema), the description is nearly complete, but it lacks context about edge cases (e.g., stopping when no run exists) or the impact on related tools like get-precheck-status. It is adequate but leaves room for helpful clarification.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to explain parameter meaning. Baseline for no params is 4, and there is nothing missing in this dimension.

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 'Stop the current precheck run' clearly states a specific verb (stop) and resource (precheck run). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like start-precheck and get-precheck-status, making its function 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 implies usage when a precheck is currently running, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or mention any prerequisites. For a simple control action, this implied guidance is minimally adequate.

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