stop_host_component

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that it skips if the component is already in INSTALLED state and returns request info for progress tracking. However, it doesn't detail authorization needs or side effects beyond stopping the component.

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 well-structured with clear sections (Tool Role, Core Functions, etc.) and is front-loaded with the main purpose. However, there is some redundancy (first sentence restated in Tool Role), and it could be slightly more concise.

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?

Given the simple input schema (two strings) and existence of output schema, the description provides adequate context. It covers core functions and usage scenarios, though could mention error handling or prerequisites like host existence. Overall, it is fairly complete for a straightforward tool.

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 coverage is 0%, so description adds significant value: host_name is defined as 'Hostname where the component resides' with an example, and component_name as 'Name of the component to stop' with examples like 'DATANODE'. This compensates for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 tool stops a specific component on a host, using specific verbs and resources. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'start_host_component' and 'restart_host_component', and provides examples like 'stop DataNode on host-A'.

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 'Required Usage Scenarios' section explicitly states when to use, e.g., when users request to stop a component on a specific host, decommissioning, or troubleshooting. It contrasts with broader service-level operations, and mentions the skip-if-already-stopped behavior.

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