tm_stop_run

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint and idempotentHint. The description adds useful behavioral details: full idempotency, success with status='IDLE', and cancellation of dispatch loops within a tick. These go 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, each with essential information. No redundant text. Highly concise and well-structured.

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 tool's simplicity (one required integer param, no output schema, annotations present), the description covers core behavior and idempotency. It does not detail post-stop state or side effects, but is sufficient for a simple stop action.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description must explain parameter semantics. It mentions 'for a profile' but does not elaborate on profile_id's meaning or format. The agent must infer its purpose from context.

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 'Stop the in-flight run for a profile', specifying verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like tm_pause_run, though the idempotent and destructive hints imply a different behavior.

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 mentions idempotency and behavior when nothing is running, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like tm_pause_run or tm_start_run. Usage context is implied but not explicit.

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