shutdown_simulator

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and does not meet it. It never says what shutdown entails (running apps are killed, in-memory state is lost), whether it requires the device to be booted first, whether it errors on an already-shutdown device, or whether the operation is reversible.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero padding, which is appropriate for a simple single-parameter action. It is efficient but so terse that it omits context rather than trimming filler.

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 need not be explained, but for a state-mutating device operation with no annotations and no usage guidance, the definition leaves out consequences and preconditions an agent needs to invoke it safely.

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 device_id parameter has 100% schema description coverage ('Simulator UDID'), so the schema already documents it. The description adds no format hints or sourcing guidance, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.

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 (Shutdown) and resource (iOS simulator), so the action is unambiguous. However it does nothing to differentiate itself from the obvious sibling boot_simulator or note its role in a device lifecycle alongside list_devices/get_device.

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 on when to shut down a simulator versus booting, resetting (reset_session), or terminating an app. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or the alternative tool an agent should pick instead.

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