ddev_poweroff

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that all projects and containers are stopped, the Mutagen daemon is stopped if running, and it is equivalent to a command that also stops the SSH agent. This is thorough for a simple stop/poweroff operation.

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: three sentences that front-load the core function, then add the Mutagen daemon behavior and usage/help pointers. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully addresses what it does, the affected scope, and the extra daemon behavior. It is complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description mentions flags generically but does not add any parameter-specific meaning, and the schema already covers everything (empty properties). This is acceptable for a no-parameter tool.

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?

Clearly states 'Stop all DDEV projects and containers' with a specific verb and scope. This differentiates it from sibling ddev_stop, which likely targets individual projects, and also mentions the Mutagen daemon side effect.

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?

Provides clear context that this is for stopping all projects rather than a single one, and cites the equivalent ddev command. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like ddev_stop or state when not to use this tool.

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