Stop Local REST API

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the core action and the prerequisite that the API must have been started by ipc_start, but it omits idempotency, failure behavior if the API is not running, and whether active connections or tasks are interrupted.

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?

A single short sentence with the action and target front-loaded. It contains no filler and is appropriately sized for a zero-parameter lifecycle operation.

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 no-parameter stop tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description supplies the essential action and prerequisite. Remaining gaps around error states and idempotency are minor, though not fully covered.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter detail, but none is needed, so the baseline of 4 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('shut down') and resource ('local REST API'), and explicitly ties it to ipc_start. This clearly distinguishes it from ipc_start and ipc_status as the opposite lifecycle action.

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 phrase 'Use to shut down... started by ipc_start' gives a clear condition for use and an implicit prerequisite. It does not name when-not-to-use cases or alternatives, but there is no obvious sibling alternative for stopping the API.

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