stop_vm

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the destructive nature ('DESTRUCTIVE') and the confirmation requirement, but does not elaborate on consequences like potential data loss or irreversibility. The forceful stop behavior is implied but not fully contextualized.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and includes a critical safety warning. No filler or unnecessary words.

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?

For a simple stop operation, the description covers the core action and safety warning, but lacks parameter details and explicit alternative guidance. Given no annotations and no output schema, it is minimally adequate but not comprehensive.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for parameter explanation. It only mentions 'confirm=True', indicating that confirm is required to be true, but does not explain 'node' or 'vmid'. This provides minimal additional meaning beyond the schema.

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 identifies the action ('Forcefully stop (power off)') and the target ('QEMU virtual machine'), distinguishing it from siblings like shutdown_vm (graceful shutdown) and pause_vm. The use of 'Forcefully' and 'power off' provides specific verb+resource clarity.

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 forceful power-off scenarios, but does not explicitly state when to use this over shutdown_vm or other alternatives. The 'DESTRUCTIVE' warning and 'Requires confirm=True' provide some usage conditions, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

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