stop_panel

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

No annotations are provided, so description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'stop' which is destructive, but lacks details on side effects, reversibility, or what happens if no server is running. The parameter schema adds the detail that omitting plot_id stops all servers, which supplements the description.

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?

Single sentence directly stating the tool's purpose. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with the action verb. Every word earns its place.

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 stop action with one optional parameter and an output schema (not shown but present), the description is mostly complete. It could mention what happens if no panel server is running or the return format, but given the low complexity, it is adequate.

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 has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'plot_id' with its own description. The tool description does not add any additional meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Description clearly identifies verb 'Stop' and resource 'Panel server launched by launch_panel', distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'launch_panel'. It is specific and 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?

States that the tool stops a server launched by 'launch_panel', providing clear context for when to use it. Does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, but the pairing with 'launch_panel' is sufficient guidance.

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