stop_virtual_machine

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only repeats the basic action without explaining side effects (e.g., whether the VM is gracefully shut down, if there's data loss risk, or if it's synchronous). Critical behavioral context is missing.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the core action and mechanism. No unnecessary words or repetition; highly efficient.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not address the stopping workflow (e.g., is the operation async?), success indicators, or potential edge cases. For a potentially impactful operation, this is insufficiently complete.

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 0%, so the description should compensate but fails to explain any parameters. While 'name' and 'namespace' are somewhat obvious from the schema, the optional 'cluster' parameter is not mentioned, and the description adds no value beyond the schema.

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 ('Stop'), the resource ('VirtualMachine'), and the specific mechanism ('by setting spec.running=false'), making it highly unambiguous. It effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like start_virtual_machine or restart_virtual_machine.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to stop vs. unpause or shut down). There is no mention of prerequisites, safety considerations, or conditions under which stopping is appropriate.

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