stop_all

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It indicates a destructive action but omits critical details such as irreversibility, side effects (e.g., disconnecting connections), or confirmation requirements. This is insufficient for a high-impact operation.

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, clear sentence with no redundancy. It could be slightly expanded with a cautionary note, but it is appropriately concise for its simplicity.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description fails to provide essential context for a destructive tool: no warning of consequences, no mention of all bots being affected, and no reference to the safer sibling 'stop_bot'. The description is too sparse to fully guide an agent.

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?

There are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%, so the description adds no additional parameter information. Baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description does not detract from that.

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 explicitly states the action (disconnect and terminate) and resource (every running bot), with a clear verb-resource structure. It effectively distinguishes from the sibling tool 'stop_bot', which targets individual bots.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'stop_bot'. The context implies it is for bulk termination, but no caveats or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving the agent without decision support.

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