terminate_run

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states that the operation targets 'in-progress' runs, but does not disclose side effects such as whether termination is immediate, whether partial outputs are discarded, or whether special permissions are required. This is minimal for a mutation tool.

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 sentence with no extraneous words, delivering the essential information immediately. It is perfectly sized for the tool's 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is sufficiently complete for its core use case, noting the constraint that the run must be in-progress. It lacks edge-case details, but for a straightforward terminate action, it is adequate.

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 schema provides a single required 'run_id' parameter with 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not mention the parameter. However, the parameter's purpose is inherently clear from its title 'Run Id' and the tool name 'terminate_run', so an agent can infer its meaning without additional description.

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 'Terminate' and identifies the resource as 'an in-progress Dagster run', which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'launch_run' (starting) and 'recent_runs' (listing). This is unambiguous and immediately actionable.

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 'in-progress' provides clear context for when this tool is applicable, implicitly indicating it should be used only for currently running runs, not queued or completed ones. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the constraint is strong enough for effective selection.

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