skypilot_cluster_stop

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

The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond the destructiveHint annotation: it explains billing implications ('billing for instances stops but disk charges continue'), data preservation on attached disks, what graceful=True does, and that a request_id is returned. It does not, however, explain the purge parameter's effect, which is a notable omission for a destructive-adjacent 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?

The description is four sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then side effects, a key parameter tip, and the return value. Every sentence adds value and there is no 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?

An output schema exists and annotations cover the destructive hint, so the description need not explain return values. However, it is incomplete for a 4-parameter stop tool because it omits purge and graceful_timeout semantics, and its blanket claim that 'data on attached disks is preserved' may be misleading if purge is set.

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 carry parameter semantics. It explains only graceful; it does not mention purge (which is likely destructive) or graceful_timeout, leaving three of four parameters undocumented. This is a significant gap given the low schema coverage.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Stop a running cluster.' It is unambiguous and specific. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like skypilot_cluster_down or skypilot_cluster_autostop, which would help an agent choose 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?

Usage is implied by 'Stop a running cluster,' and the graceful tip provides some context for when to use that parameter. But there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over cluster_down, autostop, or api_stop, and no exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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