stop_pipeline

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Stop' but does not explain cancellation semantics, irreversibility, required pipeline state, or error behavior. This is minimal for a mutating operation.

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 very concise: one clear sentence and a compact arg list. Every element earns its place, with no filler or repetition of schema data.

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?

Despite having an output schema (which could explain return values), the description lacks context about preconditions, side effects, or error conditions. The arg list is clear but does not explain the relationship between workspace/repo and the pipeline, leaving a gap for correct invocation.

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 description adds basic meaning to all three parameters, labeling pipeline_uuid as coming from list_pipelines and workspace/repo as slugs. Schema coverage is 0%, so this is helpful, but it does not clarify the optionality or necessity of workspace/repo, nor how they affect the lookup.

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 a specific action ('Stop a running pipeline') identifying both the verb and the resource. It distinguishes from siblings like trigger_pipeline and list_pipelines, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or scope limitations.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The arg description for pipeline_uuid hints at a prerequisite (from list_pipelines), but there is no stated context, exclusions, or comparison to trigger_pipeline or pipeline_steps.

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