conduyt_batch_stop_enrollments

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the single most important trait — irreversibility ('Cannot be undone') — which is real added value, but it says nothing about what happens to contacts mid-sequence, whether any prerequisite permissions or IDs are needed, or what the call reports back.

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?

Two short sentences, no filler, with the destructive nature front-loaded and the irreversibility warning immediately after. Nothing redundant with the tool name is repeated at length.

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?

For an irreversible bulk mutation with zero annotations and no output schema, the description covers the safety warning but is thin on operational detail: no requiredness guidance for campaignId vs smartListId, no note on partial-failure semantics, and no indication of how to observe the result.

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 100%, so the three parameters are already documented, including the 'reason' default. The description reinforces that scope is either a campaign or a smart list, but never states that one of the two identifiers is effectively required despite the schema listing zero required parameters — the one gap the description could have closed.

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?

States a specific verb (stop) and resource (enrollments) plus the two scoping modes: campaign or smart list. The word 'Permanently' implicitly separates it from the sibling batch_pause_enrollments, but no sibling is named explicitly, so an agent must infer the distinction.

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 implies when to use it (when enrollments must be ended for good rather than paused) but never states the alternative or exclusion explicitly. With siblings like conduyt_batch_pause_enrollments and conduyt_unenroll_from_sequence present, a routing sentence would have been cheap and valuable.

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