stop_caddy

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the critical default behavior: 'Defaults to dry_run', meaning the tool does not actually stop the process unless dry_run is set to false. This is essential context for safe usage. However, it does not detail what happens when actually stopping (e.g., confirmation, side effects), but the dry_run disclosure is a strong positive.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the main action ('Stop the Caddy process') and includes the key default behavior. Every word earns its place with no superfluous information.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and the essential dry_run default. It is complete enough for most usage, but could be enhanced by explicitly stating the effect of setting dry_run to false or noting that stopping is irreversible. Overall, it is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for the sole parameter dry_run, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'Defaults to dry_run', which gives the default value and implies the parameter controls whether the stop is simulated. However, it does not explicitly state what setting dry_run to false does (i.e., actually stop the process), leaving some ambiguity for agents unfamiliar with the dry_run convention.

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 stops the Caddy process, using a specific verb ('Stop') and resource ('Caddy process'). It also mentions the HTTP endpoint (POST /stop), which adds specificity. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that deal with configuration and validation.

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 the tool is used when you need to stop Caddy, but it does not explicitly provide when-to-use guidance or contrast with alternatives. There is no mention of when to prefer this over other tools. The dry_run default hints at safe usage, but no explicit exclusions or alternative recommendations are given.

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