origin_bridge_shutdown

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It accurately describes that the tool releases the automation connection by default and can force-close Origin when close_origin=True. This covers the key behavioral aspects, though it omits details about error handling or other side effects.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two sentences with no superfluous information. It front-loads the main action and provides additional detail in the second sentence, making it easy to scan.

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 6 parameters (all optional) and an output schema, the description adequately covers the essential behavior and the key parameter (close_origin). It does not explain return values, but the output schema likely handles that. The description is complete enough for an agent to understand the tool's core functionality.

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 input schema has 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds some context beyond the schema by explaining the default behavior for close_origin and the release action, but it does not substantially enrich the parameter meanings beyond what the schema already provides.

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's purpose: to ask the Origin GUI bridge to stop serving requests. It uses specific verbs ('stop serving') and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like origin_bridge_submit_task or origin_bridge_list_tasks, which are clearly different operations.

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 explains the default behavior and how to force-close Origin via close_origin=True, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool instead of alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites. Usage guidance is implied but not comprehensive.

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