StopRDSInstances

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions batch stopping but doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits: whether this is destructive (likely yes, but not stated), what permissions are required, whether instances can be restarted afterward, if there are rate limits, or what happens to associated resources. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 a single, efficient sentence that communicates the core purpose and usage context without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized for a tool with 2 parameters and clear functionality, though it could be slightly more front-loaded with the primary action.

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?

Given this is a destructive mutation tool (stopping cloud instances) with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It should address safety considerations, permissions, what the tool returns, and error conditions. The current description leaves too many behavioral questions unanswered for a tool that modifies production infrastructure.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters (InstanceIds and RegionId). The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema. With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3 even without additional param details in the description.

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 clearly states the action ('批量停止' - batch stop) and resource ('RDS实例' - RDS instances), making the purpose evident. It distinguishes from individual stop operations by emphasizing batch capability, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling 'StopInstances' which stops ECS instances rather than RDS instances.

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 provides some usage context ('适用于需要同时管理和停止多台RDS实例的场景' - suitable for scenarios requiring simultaneous management and stopping of multiple RDS instances), which implies when to use it (batch operations). However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention alternatives like 'StopInstances' for ECS instances or individual RDS instance stopping methods.

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