stop_modal_container

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

Discloses that it sends SIGINT and how in-flight inputs are handled. Lacks auth or prerequisite info, but for a stop tool this is sufficient.

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 succinct sentences plus an args list. No wasted words; front-loaded with the main purpose.

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?

Covers purpose, effect, parameter, and return type. Could add error handling or status when already stopped, but tools with output schema are adequately described.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates by explaining container_id: provides example format and source (from list_modal_containers), adding value beyond schema.

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?

Clearly states 'Terminate a running Modal container' with a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from siblings like stop_modal_app by focusing on containers.

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?

Describes the effect (SIGINT, cancellation of in-flight inputs) and implies a graceful stop use case. No explicit alternatives or when-not, but the behavior description provides adequate context.

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