session_stop

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; it does valuable work by spelling out the SIGINT→SIGTERM→SIGKILL escalation for graceful mode. However it says nothing about what force mode does, whether queue removal discards a pending run irrecoverably, what cross_bot implies for authorization, or whether the operation is reversible.

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?

A single dense sentence with the escalation detail parenthesized so it doesn't interrupt the main clause. Zero wasted words, and the primary action is front-loaded.

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 needn't be described, but for a five-parameter destructive operation with no annotations and 20% schema coverage, the description leaves too much unspecified — force mode, cross_bot semantics, and the fate of a removed queued run are all unaddressed.

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 only 20% — just `bot` is documented — and the description explains none of the other four parameters. It implies the meaning of mode=graceful via the signal sequence but never mentions the `force` enum value, `reason`, `cross_bot`, or what `run_id` refers to for a queued run.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ("Stop a run ... or remove it from the queue") and even discloses the escalation sequence for graceful stops. It is clearly distinct from the session_* siblings (start/ack/status/list/tail/result/send/wait), none of which terminate anything, though it doesn't explicitly contrast itself with them.

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 statement of when to use this versus alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g. does stopping a queued run differ from a running one?), and no guidance on when to choose mode=force over the default graceful path. The agent must infer the conditions from the enum alone.

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