aion_vast_stop

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it notes the required token, it does not disclose whether the stop action is reversible, what happens to the instance's billing/resources, or what kind of response the agent can expect. For a state-changing operation, this is a notable gap.

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 a single, compact sentence that conveys both the action and the authorization requirement. There is no redundant information or unnecessary detail.

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 simple one-parameter tool, the description is functional but incomplete. There is no output schema, so the description should clarify what happens after a successful stop (e.g., whether it is synchronous, idempotent, or affects billing). The absence of this information leaves the agent with uncertainties.

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 input schema already provides a complete description for the sole parameter (instance_id: 'Vast.ai instance ID to stop') with 100% coverage. The tool description adds no extra semantics beyond the action itself, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'stop' and names the resource 'Vast.ai GPU instance', which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like aion_vast_deploy and aion_vast_instances. The action and scope are unambiguous.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: to stop a running Vast.ai instance. It also states an important prerequisite (AION_SESSION_TOKEN with vast/admin access). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but for a simple lifecycle operation the context is sufficient.

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