Stop a deployment

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

Annotations already mark the tool destructive and idempotent; the description adds the behavioral detail that stopping is graceful and sends SIGTERM to the container. It also scopes behavior to exactly one deployment. This adds context beyond the structured hints without contradicting them.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: the first defines the operation and mechanism, the second gives a task-level cleanup directive, and the third sets scope. Information is front-loaded and there is no filler.

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 single-parameter, annotation-rich tool with no output schema, the description covers what the agent needs: the operation, the mechanism, the required identifier, and the cleanup expectation. Nothing material is missing.

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% and the request_id parameter is already described as 'The request_id of the deployment to stop.' The description adds little beyond confirming lookup by request_id and single-deployment scope, so it earns the baseline score for schema-covered parameters.

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?

States a specific action ('stop'), a specific resource ('one deployment'), and the required identifier ('by request_id'), and distinguishes itself from any bulk-stop alternative ('bulk stop is deliberately not exposed'). It is unambiguous and differentiates from sibling tools like edgegap_deploy.

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 explicit usage context: the agent should stop every deployment it started for testing before ending its task. It also clarifies the tool's single-deployment scope and that bulk stop is intentionally unavailable, preventing the agent from seeking a bulk alternative. It does not explicitly point to sibling tools for finding request_ids, but 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.