shutdown_vm

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the graceful shutdown via ACPI and the fallback mechanism controlled by force_stop. However, it does not disclose what happens on timeout=0, error conditions, return values, or whether the operation is reversible.

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 a short sentence explaining the core functionality, followed by a clear, bulleted parameter list. Every sentence is necessary, and the information is front-loaded.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose and parameters adequately but lacks details on preconditions (e.g., VM must exist and be running), error handling, output behavior, or the requirement for ACPI support in the VM. Given the complexity and presence of many sibling tools, more context would be helpful.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description adds meaning beyond the raw schema. It explains each parameter: node, vmid, timeout (in seconds), and force_stop (default true). It clarifies the role of timeout and force_stop in the fallback behavior.

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 it shuts down a VM gracefully via ACPI, with a fallback to hard stop. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like stop_vm (likely immediate kill) and reboot_vm (restart). The verb 'shut down' and resource 'VM' are specific and unambiguous.

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 implies usage for graceful shutdown but does not explicitly state when to use this vs. siblings like stop_vm. It mentions the fallback behavior but lacks explicit do's and don'ts or alternative tool references.

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