Stop VM

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

Annotations already mark the operation as destructive and non-read-only. The description adds valuable behavioral detail by explaining the graceful soft shutdown versus forced hard power-off, and states that a confirmation message is returned. It does not mention vm_password or idempotency, but those are partially covered by annotations and schema.

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 compact and well-structured, with a clear purpose line followed by Args and Returns sections in just six short lines. Every sentence earns its place without 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 simple stop operation with full schema coverage and strong annotations, the description covers purpose, mode behavior, and return value. It lacks alternative guidance and does not mention the vm_password field in Args, but the schema compensates for that. Overall, it is sufficient for an agent to use the tool 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's Args section repeats the vmx_path and mode descriptions from the schema but omits vm_password entirely. Since the schema already fully describes all parameters, the description adds no new semantic value beyond what's structured.

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 opening line 'Stop (power off) a VMware Fusion virtual machine' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly identifying the action. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like fusion_start_vm, fusion_suspend_vm, and fusion_reset_vm by naming the exact operation.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like suspend or reset. The only usage context is the mode parameter ('soft' vs 'hard'), which is parameter-level detail rather than tool-selection guidance. No exclusions or alternative tool references are given.

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