session_stop

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states that the tool kills the tmux session but preserves the conversation, and that resuming is possible later with session_start. This is good behavioral transparency, though it could be more explicit about whether the session is terminated abruptly or any side effects, but it is effective.

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 concise and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core action, and the following sentences provide usage guidance and alternatives. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, use case, and relationship to sibling tools. For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, it is adequately complete. It lacks mention of error handling or prerequisites, but these are not critical for the tool's simple function.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description does not explicitly describe the 'name' parameter. However, the tool name and description make it clear that 'name' refers to the tmux session to stop, and the context adds meaning beyond the generic schema field. Given the single simple parameter, this is adequate but could be improved by explicitly stating the parameter's role.

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's action: 'Kill the tmux session but keep the conversation.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly mentioning session_destroy for forgetting entirely and session_start for resuming, making its unique purpose obvious.

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 explicit usage context: use this to free a session's transcript so claude_run can address it without contention, and use session_destroy to forget it entirely. It also names session_start for resuming, giving clear when-to-use and alternative guidance.

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