stop_application

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

With no annotations, the description discloses state-dependent behavior (RUNNING, STOPPED, DEAD/DELETED), which is useful context for side effects and errors. It does not mention timeout expiration behavior or detailed error handling, but the provided behaviors are clear.

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 short, well-organized with a bulleted list for state behaviors, and front-loads the primary purpose. Every sentence contributes value with no redundancy.

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 covers the main operation and state behaviors, and an output schema exists for return values. However, it lacks information about timeout failure outcomes and more nuanced error cases, leaving a minor gap for a stateful operation.

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 input schema has 100% coverage for both parameters (name and timeout) with descriptions, so the description doesn't need to add parameter details. It doesn't, but baseline 3 is appropriate since schema handles the heavy lifting.

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 an application on the Itential Platform, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like start_application and restart_application by focusing on the 'stop' action and providing state-dependent behavior.

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 usage for stopping a running application but does not explicitly state when to prefer this over start/restart or mention alternatives. The state-based behavior provides some context for when it's applicable, but no explicit exclusions or alternative guidance.

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