stop_session

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly states the core behavior, but it does not disclose side effects such as losing interpreter memory/state, whether stopping a nonexistent session errors, or whether the action is idempotent. The primary behavior is transparent, but consequences are left implicit.

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 short sentence with the verb front-loaded and no filler. Every word contributes meaning, and there is no redundant restatement of the tool name.

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, parameterless lifecycle command, the description is nearly complete for selecting and invoking the tool. It could be improved by noting the precondition that a session must exist and what happens if no current session is active, but these are minor gaps.

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 and schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to add about parameter meanings. This is the appropriate baseline for a parameterless tool.

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 states a specific action ('Stop') and a specific resource ('current code interpreter session'), making it immediately clear what this tool does. It is naturally distinct from siblings like start_session, get_session, and list_sessions, which have opposite or observational purposes.

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 'current session' provides clear context: this tool is for ending the active session rather than creating, inspecting, or listing sessions. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but for a zero-parameter lifecycle command the intended usage is clear.

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