skypilot_api_stop

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds non-trivial behavioral context beyond that: the locality restriction and the concrete error behavior for remote servers, which tells the agent this call can fail deterministically on the wrong target.

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?

Three short sentences, action stated first, then the two constraints. Every sentence carries distinct information with no repetition of the title or annotations.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the destructive nature is carried by annotations. For a zero-parameter, locally-scoped stop operation, the action plus the locality/error constraint is everything an agent needs to invoke it correctly.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so per the baseline there is nothing for the description to document. No parameter-related text is needed and none is misleading.

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?

States a precise verb+resource ("Stop the SkyPilot API server") that an agent can immediately separate from skypilot_cluster_stop, skypilot_api_cancel, skypilot_api_status, and skypilot_api_logout. The scope qualifier ("API server") targets exactly one subsystem, so no schema inspection is needed to route correctly.

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?

Gives an explicit precondition and an explicit failure condition: it only works on locally hosted servers and raises an error for remote ones. It does not name an alternative to use for remote servers (e.g. whether any sibling handles that case), which is the only missing piece.

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