stop_session

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states 'close the session' without disclosing side effects (e.g., terminating running processes, losing unsaved data) or the tool's safety profile. This is a bare statement with no added transparency.

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 very short and free of fluff, but the brevity borders on under-specification. It is not structured to front-load practical information, and the Args section already appears in the schema, adding redundancy.

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?

With no annotations and minimal description, the tool lacks completeness for an agent to understand the full context of stopping a session. The output schema exists, but the description does not clarify the return behavior or the impact on related sessions. Given the simple purpose, some context is still necessary, especially regarding killing active operations.

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%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It repeats the parameter name 'session_id' and describes it as the session identifier to close, which adds little beyond the schema's title 'Session Id'. The default value 'default' is not explained, and there is no elaboration on accepted formats or behaviors.

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 closes a specified Vivado session, using a specific verb ('关闭') and a distinct resource ('会话' = session). This differentiates it from sibling tools like start_session or list_sessions.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any mention of preconditions or typical use cases. The description only states what it does, not when to use it, leaving the agent without selection context.

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