stop_container

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it adds nothing beyond the two-word name. It does not state whether the stop is graceful or forced, what happens if the container is already stopped, whether it is reversible, or whether the container is removed afterward.

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 only two words, which is technically brief but is under-specification rather than genuine conciseness. There is nothing to front-load or trim because no useful content was written.

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 mutation tool in a dense container-management family with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented required parameter, the description is completely insufficient. An agent cannot call it correctly or safely on this text alone.

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 description coverage is 0% and the single 'id' parameter is undocumented in both schema and description. The description makes no attempt to clarify whether 'id' is a container ID, name, or short hash, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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 states a clear verb+resource ('Stop container'), so an agent knows the basic operation. However, it offers no differentiation from the many nearby siblings such as kill_container, pause_container, or restart_container, and it gives no scope or semantics beyond the name.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus kill_container, pause_container, or restart_container, and no preconditions (e.g., must the container be running). Usage is only inferred from the tool name.

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