Turn off all chaos scenarios to restore normal stub behavior in a running WireMock test harness. Use this to reset your API simulation after robustness testing.
Turn all chaos scenarios off: the stubs behave normally again.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| wiremock_url | No | http://localhost:8080 |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| active | Yes | ||
| wiremock_url | Yes | ||
| mappings_added | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so repeat-safety is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond that by stating the observable result — all scenarios off and stubs returning to normal — but says nothing about what happens if no scenarios are active or whether it affects a specific WireMock instance.
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?
One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler; the scope ('all') and the resulting state are both stated immediately.
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 needn't be described, and the tool is simple with no nested objects or enums. The only gap is the unaddressed wiremock_url parameter, which is minor given its default.
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 single wiremock_url parameter has 0% schema description coverage and is never mentioned in the description, so an agent gets no explanation of which WireMock server is targeted. The default (http://localhost:8080) in the schema mitigates the risk but the description does not compensate for the coverage gap.
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 specific verb (turn off) and resource (all chaos scenarios) with a clear outcome (stubs behave normally again). The contrast with the sibling activate_chaos is implied by the name symmetry and the word 'off', but the description never names the alternative explicitly.
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?
No when-to-use guidance is given: it doesn't say whether this is the global reset versus list_chaos_scenarios or activate_chaos, nor what prerequisites exist (e.g. whether scenarios must already be active). Usage must be inferred entirely from the name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.