terminal_stop

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

With no annotations available, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. 'Stop and forget' suggests termination and removal from session lists, but does not clarify whether running processes are killed, what happens to output, or if the operation is reversible. This lack of detail is a significant gap.

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 unnecessary words, which is concise. However, it could be restructured to incorporate essential parameter or behavioral information without losing brevity.

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 (1 parameter, no output schema), the description should at least explain what 'forget' means and the effect on terminal listing. The current text omits these details, making it insufficient for an agent to use correctly.

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. It fails to mention the required 'sessionId' parameter, its purpose, or how to obtain it (likely from terminal_start or terminal_list). This leaves the agent with no context for the parameter.

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 phrase 'Stop and forget a persistent terminal session' clearly specifies the action ('stop and forget') and the resource ('persistent terminal session'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like terminal_start, terminal_read, etc.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., terminal_write to send an exit command), nor any prerequisites or scenarios where stopping is appropriate.

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