Ah, see there's a difference between low stress and low toxicity jobs.
There exists two forms of stress: positive (eustress) and negative (distress).
Positive stress is actually strengthening, it's the challenges that make life feel worthwhile, without it, life in actually more unbearable than if there's too much negative stress. Some people think a less challenging job is more pleasant, but that isn't necessarily true, some of the easiest jobs I've had have been the most miserable.
One reason was that without positive stress, the work was unbearably tedious and held no reward, in addition, my direct supervisor was a moron, so even with task stress, there was still plenty of toxicity.
On the flip side, some of the most pleasant jobs I've had have been insanely challenging and stressful, but I had near total autonomy, and the stakes for me personally in the event of task failure were minimal.
So lowering stress and challenge doesn't necessarily produce and easier to handle job, but systematically identifying what elements of toxicity you are disproportionately affected by will help you narrow down which jobs would best suit your comfort.
For me, the key negative stresses are ineffectual executives, any degree of day to day direct supervision (I have serious problems with authority), performance metrics that don't align with my perspective of what constitutes optimal work, and generally inflexible corporate structures. If I can avoid all of those, I can usually have a blast, even if I'm under diamond forging pressure.
