stop_tunnel

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It only states that the tool stops an active tunnel, but does not disclose side effects, required permissions, or what happens if the tunnel is not found. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the action and providing a key reference. Every word earns its place without unnecessary detail.

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 simplicity of the tool (single parameter, no annotations), the description covers the essential purpose and prerequisite. However, it could include brief information about error handling or the output schema for completeness.

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 parameter 'tunnel_id' is explained only as 'its ID' in the description. Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate further. It partially does by linking to list_tunnels, but it does not specify the format or examples of the ID.

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 action 'Stop an active tunnel' and specifies the required parameter 'tunnel_id'. It also distinguishes the tool from its sibling 'list_tunnels' by referencing it.

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 provides a clear prerequisite: 'Use list_tunnels to find tunnel IDs.' This guides the agent on when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or discuss any alternatives.

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