alethia_activate_kill_switch

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses significant behavioral context: the VITRON-EA1 policy gate remains armed, subsequent tell() calls will be blocked with reason KILL_SWITCH_ACTIVE, and this state persists until reset. This gives the agent a clear picture of the tool's side effects and lasting impact.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, then the behavioral consequence, then the usage guidance. Every sentence provides essential information with no redundancy.

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?

The description covers the action, immediate effect, post-activation state, reset condition, and specific use cases. For a kill switch with no output schema, this is complete and leaves no major gaps in the agent's understanding.

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 schema already fully describes the optional 'reason' parameter as 'Optional explanation that lands in the audit trail for later review.' The tool description does not add any additional semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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?

The description begins with 'Halt all current and queued automation immediately,' which is a specific verb and resource that clearly defines the tool's action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like alethia_status or alethia_tell by focusing on the kill switch functionality.

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 explicitly lists when to use the tool: when an agent is acting unsafely, when human review is required, or to enforce a hard boundary at the end of a controlled test run. However, it does not mention when not to use it or point to alternative tools, so it falls just 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.