EasyPanel MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

stop_service

DestructiveIdempotent

Stop a running service, taking it offline until it is started again. Halt a service to perform maintenance or free resources.

Instructions

Stop a running service (takes it offline until started again).

Args: service_id: Service ID

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "service_id": "<service_id>"
    },
    "name": "stop_service"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`service_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Sep 5, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint and destructiveHint. The description adds useful behavioral context by noting the service goes offline until explicitly started again, implying reversibility and distinguishing this from permanent deletion.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The definition is short and front-loaded with the core action and effect. The Args section is slightly redundant with the schema, but it does not make the description bloated or hard to parse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple one-parameter tool with annotations covering idempotency and destructiveness, plus an output schema, the description is mostly sufficient. The main missing piece is guidance on when to choose stop over restart or delete, but the core invocation context is clear.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The only parameter, service_id, is documented only as 'Service ID', which merely restates the schema title. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should add more meaning, such as where to find the ID, expected format, or behavior when the service is already stopped.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States the specific action 'Stop a running service' with a clear resource and immediately clarifies the effect ('takes it offline until started again'). This distinguishes it from related siblings like delete_service, restart_service, and start_service.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is given about when to use stop_service versus its siblings. The description does not mention alternatives such as restart_service or delete_service, nor does it state conditions like 'use this to temporarily take a service offline'.

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