stop_session

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent operation, so the safety profile is supplied structurally. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say whether the stop is graceful or forced, whether in-flight work is discarded, whether the session record or its history survives, or what happens on a second call given idempotentHint=false.

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 technically concise with zero redundant wording, but this is under-specification rather than economy: three words carry none of the information an agent needs. Nothing is front-loaded beyond a restatement of the 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. But for a mutating lifecycle tool whose one parameter is entirely undocumented, the definition leaves critical gaps: effect on the session, recoverability, and error conditions are all unstated.

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% for the single required parameter, so the description carries the full burden of explaining session_id — and it says nothing. It does not indicate the identifier's format or that it likely comes from list_sessions/start_session.

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?

"Stop a session" names a verb and a resource, so the basic purpose is inferable. However, it gives no scope or boundary: it does not distinguish itself from siblings like start_session, read_session, list_sessions, or the superficially similar service_restart/service_reload, and leaves ambiguous what a "session" is (shell session, agent session, DB session).

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no pointers to alternatives or to how to obtain a valid session_id. The agent must infer everything from the tool name alone.

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