QNX Host MCP

qnx_image_stop

Stops only a verified server-owned instance and returns UNSAFE_CONFIGURATION if ownership or command scope cannot be confirmed, with a 30-second deadline.

Instructions

Stop only a verified server-owned instance. Returns UNSAFE_CONFIGURATION when ownership or command scope cannot be established. Deadline: 30 seconds.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "qnx_image_stop"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose real behavior: a safety gate on ownership/command scope, a specific failure code (UNSAFE_CONFIGURATION), and a 30-second deadline. It does not say whether the stop is graceful or forced, whether the call is idempotent when nothing is running, or what a success response looks like — meaningful gaps for a mutation with zero annotation coverage.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, each carrying distinct information: scope constraint, failure mode, and time budget. The safety constraint is front-loaded and nothing is redundant.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The precondition, one error code, and the timeout are covered, which is good for a zero-param action tool. However, with no output schema, the description should also describe the success return (and other error codes), and it omits any mention of graceful-vs-forced shutdown semantics.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter meaning to add; the baseline applies. The description correctly implies the target instance is resolved implicitly rather than passed in, which is consistent with the empty schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Stop ... instance') and narrows scope to 'verified server-owned instance', which lets an agent distinguish it from the build/start siblings. It does not explicitly contrast with qnx_operation_cancel, which could plausibly also halt work, so differentiation is strong but not complete.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The word 'Stop' plus the ownership precondition implies usage against a running image, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use statement and no pointer to qnx_operation_cancel or qnx_image_start as alternatives. Guidance is implied rather than stated.

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

Deploy Server