Gracefully shut down the running Caddy server through its admin API. Pass confirm=true to prevent accidental shutdowns.
Gracefully shut down the Caddy server. Requires confirm=true to prevent accidental shutdown.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| confirm | Yes | Must be true to confirm shutdown |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds meaningful context by specifying 'gracefully' shutdown and the confirm=true safeguard, which helps the agent understand the manner and safety requirement of the operation.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every word contributes value. There is no filler or redundant elaboration beyond the necessary confirmation note.
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 one-parameter stop operation with clear annotations and full schema coverage, the description is sufficient. It does not explain return values or edge cases, but given the low complexity and existing structured data, that is acceptable.
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?
The input schema fully describes the confirm parameter with 100% coverage ('Must be true to confirm shutdown'). The description only repeats this requirement without adding new semantic detail, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 uses a specific verb 'shut down' with a clear resource 'Caddy server', and it is distinct from sibling tools that handle config, status, or routes. The action and target are 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 its use (to stop the server) but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or when not to use it. The confirm requirement is a prerequisite, not a usage guideline. It lacks explicit context for selection among siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.