Gracefully power off a virtual machine domain, or force shutdown if needed, using its name or UUID.
Shutdown/Power off a domain (graceful by default)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| force | No | If true, force off (destroy) | |
| nameOrUuid | Yes | Domain name or UUID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
There are no annotations, so the description is the only source of behavioral info. It discloses 'graceful by default', which adds context beyond the schema, but it does not mention other behavioral aspects such as error handling or consequences of force (which are covered in the schema's force parameter description). The description is minimal but not misleading.
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 sentence with no filler, front-loading the purpose and the key default. Every word earns its place.
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 tool with only two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and the default behavior. The schema covers the parameters, so the description is sufficient. It does not discuss edge cases, but for this simple operation it is adequately 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?
The schema already documents both parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds the default behavior of graceful shutdown, clarifying that force is optional and non-default, which gives extra meaning 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 verb (shutdown/power off) and the resource (a domain), and the default behavior is noted. It distinguishes from siblings like start, reboot, and suspend.
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 is clear about what the tool does, providing the context of shutting down a domain. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the sibling names (start, reboot) make the distinction obvious. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to choose shutdown over reboot or suspend.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.