kasm_stop

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. Calling out 'destroy' usefully signals the operation is destructive and terminal, but it says nothing about irreversibility, what happens to session state/output, or any permission requirements.

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 tight sentence with the action front-loaded and the usage cue trailing. No filler and nothing to trim.

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 one-parameter, likely terminal tool with no output schema, the description covers what it does and when to use it. It is slightly thin on the consequences of destruction, which an agent deciding to kill a session might want.

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%, and the schema already explains the session_id default ('omit to use your newest running session'). The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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') plus the resource ('Kasm session'), and the parenthetical 'destroy' removes ambiguity about what stopping entails. It is immediately distinguishable from the sibling kasm_start.

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?

Gives a clear triggering condition ('when the task is finished or the owner asks'), which is enough to know when to reach for this over the other session tools. It does not name an alternative or state when-not to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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