stop_proxy

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

The description uses 'best-effort kill', which transparently indicates the operation may not be guaranteed. However, it does not disclose other behavioral aspects like side effects (e.g., terminating connections) or required permissions, and there are no annotations to supplement.

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, compact sentence that conveys the core action and its nature (best-effort). No unnecessary words, and the key information 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 no parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It lacks details on what 'configured proxy' refers to, but with sibling context, it is adequate.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter meaning. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on the tool's purpose.

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 that the tool performs a 'best-effort kill of the configured proxy process(es)', using a specific verb ('kill') and resource ('proxy process'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like start_proxy (start) and proxy_info (info).

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 implies usage when one wants to stop a proxy, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like set_git_proxy or check. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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