runtime_smoke_stop

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint and idempotentHint. The description adds 'idempotently stop' and 'return cleanup evidence', adding some behavioral context. No contradiction, but missing details on error states or side effects.

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, which is excessively brief. It lacks essential information about the parameter and usage, making it underspecified rather than efficiently concise.

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?

Given the complexity of durable runtime smoke runs, many sibling tools, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits what 'cleanup evidence' means, prerequisites, and error handling.

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 coverage is 0% and the description provides no explanation of the run_id parameter beyond its name. The agent receives no guidance on how to obtain or format this required parameter.

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 a durable runtime smoke run and returns cleanup evidence. It uses a specific verb and resource, but does not differentiate from sibling tools like runtime_smoke_cleanup_contract or runtime_smoke_get_result.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or provide any context about its role among many runtime_smoke_* siblings.

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