VPS_stopProjectV1

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

The description discloses important behavioral details: graceful shutdown, reverse dependency order, and preservation of data/volumes. However, it lacks details on authorization requirements, rate limits, or whether the operation is synchronous. Given no annotations, this is still valuable.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core action. It is efficient and contains no superfluous text.

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?

The description adequately explains the tool's behavior and result. It could mention reversibility via VPS_startProjectV1, but given sibling context and no output schema, it is reasonably complete.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The tool description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides for projectName and virtualMachineId. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Stops') and clearly identifies the resource ('running services in a Docker Compose project'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like VPS_stopVirtualMachineV1 and VPS_deleteProjectV1 by emphasizing that data and configurations are preserved.

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 provides clear guidance on when to use this tool ('temporarily halt a project without removing data'). While it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternatives, the context of siblings like VPS_startProjectV1 and VPS_deleteProjectV1 implies proper usage.

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