Stop deployment

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

Beyond the annotations, the description reveals that running jobs are terminated and billing stops, which is meaningful behavioral context. It is consistent with destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, though it could add more about reversibility.

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?

Two compact sentences front-load the action and consequences, then give usage guidance. No filler or redundancy.

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 single-parameter stop operation with annotations covering safety and idempotency, the description supplies the key behavioral and usage context. Nothing essential is missing.

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%, but the only required parameter is deployment_id and its role is inferable from 'Stops a deployment.' The description does not explicitly explain the parameter, yet with one self-documenting string field the gap is minor.

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 states a precise verb-resource pair: 'Stops a deployment and its running jobs,' and adds the consequential effect that billing stops. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like start_deployment or extend_deployment.

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?

It gives explicit conditions for use: 'when the user is done or when a deployment can never schedule.' It does not name alternatives or exclusions explicitly, but the criteria are clear enough for an agent to select this over start/list operations.

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