Shutdown MCP Server

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

The description reveals detailed behavioral traits beyond annotations: terminates Proton Bridge regardless of origin, disconnects IMAP/SMTP, scrubs credentials from memory, then exits. This adds significant context to the destructiveHint annotation.

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?

Two sentences with front-loaded purpose and bulleted actions. No wasted words; every sentence earns its place. Efficient and clear.

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 destructiveHint annotation and output schema, the description covers key behaviors. Lacks explicit mention of irreversibility or that restart requires external action, but otherwise complete for a shutdown 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 100% (one optional parameter with clear description). The tool description adds no additional semantic value for the parameter beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 shuts down the MCP server and lists specific actions (terminate Proton Bridge, disconnect IMAP/SMTP, scrub credentials, exit). This distinguishes it from siblings like restart_server, providing a specific verb+resource.

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 implies usage for graceful shutdown but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives (e.g., restart_server) or when not to use. The destructive nature is clear, but no direct guidance on prerequisites or exclusion conditions.

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