Stop an overseer task

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

Beyond the annotations (idempotentHint, destructiveHint), the description explains that stopping a task tears down the underlying process tree, that ambiguous names result in an error listing candidates, and that user-owned tasks are refused without force. This adds significant behavioral 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?

Three dense sentences with no filler; each provides distinct information about the tool's operation.

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 simple 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, matching behavior, underlying process implications, error handling, and force flag, making it self-contained.

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 no descriptions (0% coverage), but the description clarifies that 'task' accepts an id or name substring, and 'force' overrides refusal for user-started tasks. This fully compensates for the schema gap.

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 the specific verb 'Stop' and identifies the resource as 'a running task' with the method 'by id or name substring'. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like overseer_run (start) and overseer_restart (restart).

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 provides conditions: multiple matches cause an error, and stopping tasks started by others requires force. However, it does not explicitly reference alternative tools for starting/restarting tasks, so it lacks explicit vs-alternative guidance.

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