Stop container

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond what the annotations already imply: readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. It does not say what happens to the container's state, whether a session must be active, whether the operation can fail on an already-stopped container, or what the response looks like.

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 brief but repetitive: 'Stop container. Stops a specific container.' The second sentence mostly restates the first and does not add enough information to justify the extra sentence.

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 mutation tool with no output schema and no parameter documentation, the description is incomplete. An agent is not told how sessionId and containerId relate, what preconditions exist, or how this differs from pause/restart/start. The minimal text leaves important decision-making to inference.

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%, so the description carries the burden of explaining the parameters. It only clarifies that a specific container is stopped, which makes 'containerId' loosely obvious, but 'sessionId' is left unexplained and neither parameter receives explicit semantics.

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 names the specific operation ('Stops a specific container') and identifies the resource, so an agent can tell this is a per-container stop action. It does not differentiate it from related siblings like restart_container or pause_container, which keeps it from a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool instead of start_container, restart_container, pause_container, or unpause_container. No conditions, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned.

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