stop

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses idempotency and that it targets a process tree, but it does not state side effects on collected data, reversibility, permission requirements, or behavior when no process is running.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence; every word earns its place. 'Idempotently' is a high-value qualifier and 'running crawler process tree' precisely scopes the target.

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?

Despite a simple schema and an output schema, the definition omits usage context and behavioral side effects, which matters because annotations are absent. An agent cannot tell whether stopping is safe mid-write, whether data is persisted, or how stop relates to cleanup/delete_run.

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 has no description for run_id (0% coverage), and the description never mentions run_id, its format, or where to obtain it. The schema title 'Run Id' and the tool's object give some implicit context, but the description itself adds no parameter-level meaning.

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 names a specific action ('stop'), an object ('running crawler process tree'), and a key semantic ('idempotently'), which makes it distinguishable from sibling tools like delete_run or cleanup. It is not a tautology and conveys exactly what the tool does.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use stop versus delete_run, cleanup, or status. The only implication is that it applies to a currently running process, but there are no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative selection criteria.

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