mirrored_database_stop_mirroring

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

Annotations already establish that this is a mutating but non-destructive operation (readOnlyHint false, destructiveHint false), and the description adds no behavioral context beyond restating the action. It does not disclose whether stopping is reversible, what state the database enters, or what impact it has on downstream mirroring consumers.

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 a single, direct sentence with no filler or redundancy. It states the action immediately and is appropriately sized for a simple two-parameter tool.

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 schema and annotations cover the parameters and the safety profile reasonably well, and the operation is simple, so the description is minimally adequate. It still omits usage conditions, reversibility, and effects, but the absence of an output schema and nested objects keeps the burden relatively low.

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 description coverage is 100%, with workspaceId and mirroredDatabaseId both having descriptions, so the schema carries the parameter meaning. The tool description adds no additional parameter context, which matches the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 states a clear action (Stop mirroring) and a clear resource (a mirrored database), so an agent can tell what operation is being offered. However, it mostly restates the tool name and does not explicitly differentiate itself from related operations like mirrored_database_delete or mirrored_database_update, so it stops short of the strongest sibling-aware clarity.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as mirrored_database_start_mirroring, mirrored_database_get_mirroring_status, or mirrored_database_delete. It also omits prerequisites like the database currently having mirroring enabled, leaving usage conditions entirely to inference.

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