pbs_node_task_stop

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

Without annotations, the description fully discloses the destructive nature, dry-run behavior, confirm=True execution details, HTTP endpoint, and the fact that it returns a cancellation signal (not immediate).

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 packed but clear, starting with the core purpose and risks. It efficiently conveys all critical information in a single, well-organized sentence.

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 existence of an output schema and high schema coverage, the description provides sufficient context for a destructive cancellation tool, covering risks, dry-run, and prerequisites. Could mention error scenarios.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are documented. The description adds context for confirm (executes DELETE) and upid (find via pbs_tasks_list), but doesn't enhance understanding of node or proximo_target beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool stops/cancels a running PBS task, specifies it's a mutation, and distinguishes from pbs_tasks_list by directing users to find UPIDs via that tool.

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?

Provides clear context: dry-run default, risk of inconsistency, and points to pbs_tasks_list for UPID retrieval. However, it lacks explicit instruction on when to use vs other task-related siblings like pbs_node_task_status.

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