Abort Kimi Session

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint, but the description goes further: it says the action changes session state, can interrupt in-flight commands or delegated work, and that persisted session history may remain. It also discloses the return value, adding real context beyond the 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?

Three sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, followed by necessary caveats and return behavior. Every sentence earns its place.

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 one-parameter destructive action, this is complete. It covers when to use the tool, prerequisites, side effects, persistence nuance, and return value, even without an output schema.

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 sole parameter sessionId is fully documented in the schema, including the instruction to use the ID returned by delegation or discovery tools. The description reinforces the need to confirm the session ID, but does not add meaningful semantic detail beyond the schema.

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?

Description states the specific action: 'Abort an existing Kimi session that should no longer continue running.' It uses a clear verb and resource, and is easily distinguished from sibling delegation and status tools.

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 gives explicit guidance: 'Use only after confirming the target session ID' and explains the consequence of interrupting in-flight commands or delegated work. It does not name alternative tools or explicit when-not-to-use conditions, but the context is clear.

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