service_stop

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the bar is lower. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: '需二次确认' (requires second confirmation) and the warning that stopping ssh/dropbear will interrupt the connection, both of which are absent from the annotations and schema.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first clause states the operation, followed by confirmation and connection-risk warnings. Every sentence contributes useful information with no filler or repetition.

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 key safety context and confirms the return-structure relationship to service_start, and an output schema exists. However, it relies on sibling service_start for parameter semantics and does not specify how the confirm parameter should be set, leaving a real gap for a destructive tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description only says parameters mirror service_start without explaining 'name' or the expected value/format of 'confirm'. Even though the confirmation requirement is implied, the agent is left with insufficient information about how to satisfy the confirm parameter.

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 '停止指定服务' (stop specified service), naming both the verb and the target resource. This distinguishes it from siblings like service_start and service_restart, and it additionally flags that this is a write operation.

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 usage is implied by the verb 'stop', but there is no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives guidance. The description does add a valuable warning about stopping ssh/dropbear causing disconnection and mentions the confirmation requirement, which helps the agent execute correctly but not select the tool.

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