editor-stop

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

Discloses that it terminates the process and has no effect if nothing is running. No annotations exist, so the description carries the behavioral burden; it is adequate but could mention immediate termination or 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?

Two sentences: first defines purpose, second provides usage guidance. No wasted words, front-loaded with action.

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?

Covers purpose, usage, and behavioral effect. Lacks detail on return value or side effects, but for a simple stop tool, it is sufficient. No output schema exists, so return value is not expected.

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 only parameter 'reason' is described in the input schema with 'Brief explanation of why you are calling this tool'. The description adds no further meaning beyond the schema, and schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 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 clearly states the tool terminates the running Godot project process, using specific verb 'terminates' and resource 'currently running Godot project process'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like editor-run which starts the project.

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 states when to use: 'stop a project started with run_project' and when not: 'No effect if no project is running', providing clear usage context.

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