debug_terminate

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description adds limited value by stating 'Returns: confirmation'. It does not elaborate on side effects like unsaved state loss, but does not contradict annotations.

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 that is very concise. It conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words, though it could be slightly more detailed without losing conciseness.

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 a simple stop command with good annotation coverage, the description is minimally complete. However, it lacks usage guidelines and behavioral transparency beyond what annotations provide, making it adequate but not fully robust.

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?

The tool has no parameters, and the input schema is empty, so the description adds nothing beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as there is no need for parameter explanation.

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 stops the running game, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like debug_continue or debug_step_over which are about continuing or stepping.

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?

No context on when to use this tool versus alternatives is provided. The description lacks any guidance on prerequisites, such as the game needing to be running, or when it would be inappropriate to use.

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