supervisor_stop_addon

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

No annotations provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It only states the tool stops a running add-on, without disclosing side effects (e.g., data loss, state changes, if it's safe to stop mid-operation). The agent lacks behavioral context.

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, concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse. However, it may be too brief, risking under-specification.

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 that an output schema exists, the description need not detail returns. But it lacks essential context about the add-on lifecycle, error conditions (e.g., if already stopped), and confirmation of success. The tool is simple but the description is incomplete for safe invocation.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning to the single parameter 'slug'. It does not explain what slug refers to (add-on identifier) or how to obtain it. The agent must rely on prior knowledge.

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 stops a running add-on. The verb 'stop' and resource 'add-on' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like start, restart, install. Could be more precise about the nature of the stop (graceful vs forceful), but it's adequate.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., add-on must be running), when not to use, or potential risks. The agent has to infer usage from context.

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