stop_search

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. Description adds behavioral context: stops gracefully, search results remain available for 5 minutes, automatic cleanup. This goes beyond annotations, though it could mention lack of undo.

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?

Description is concise with no wasted words. First sentence states purpose, followed by usage guidance, behavioral note, and comparison. Each sentence adds value and is front-loaded.

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 has one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, and behavior well. It could mention error handling (e.g., invalid sessionId) but overall is complete for the tool's simplicity.

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?

Input schema has one required parameter (sessionId) with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain what sessionId is or how to obtain it, leaving the agent to infer. With no parameter documentation, this is insufficient.

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 clearly states 'Stop an active search.' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like force_terminate and kill_process by referencing the analogy, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly says when to use: 'when you've found what you need or if a search is taking too long.' It also compares to force_terminate but does not explicitly say when not to use, though it's implied.

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