instance_stop

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

Annotations already declare this is not read-only and is destructive, and the description adds useful behavioral context: the instance serves no traffic until restarted and the action is immediate. It does not describe confirmation, error behavior, or side effects beyond traffic loss, but it meaningfully improves on the annotations.

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 front-loaded: the main action and scope come first, followed by the sibling alternative and the immediate effect. Every clause 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 single-parameter destructive tool with annotations covering safety and a fully described schema, the description is largely complete: it names the impact and immediate behavior. It does not mention failure handling or restart expectations beyond traffic loss, but no major invocation gap remains.

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 100%, so the hostname parameter is already documented. The description reinforces that the tool targets one instance by hostname but adds no format, validation, or example semantics 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 states a specific verb and resource: stop one instance, scoped by hostname. It also explicitly distinguishes the single-instance action from the bulk sibling instances_stop_all, so an agent can select it without opening the schema.

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?

It gives a clear usage condition by specifying one instance versus all instances and naming instances_stop_all for the bulk case. It does not discuss other nearby alternatives such as deletion or reload, but the primary routing guidance is clear.

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