stop service MONA Cloud

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, carrying the safety profile. The description adds only a thin policy note ("always allows stopping") and says nothing about data retention, reversibility confirmation, or what state the service ends in.

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 compact sentence with the action front-loaded and no filler. It is appropriately sized, though the cost rationale could be trimmed without loss.

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 destructive mutation with no output schema and one undocumented parameter, the description omits what happens to the underlying VPS/database, whether the stop is reversible, and how to obtain service_id, leaving meaningful gaps beyond what annotations cover.

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 50%: sandbox is documented in the schema while service_id is not. The description partially compensates by clarifying that the target is a VPS or database, but gives no format, source, or recovery guidance for service_id.

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 specific verb ("Dừng"/stop) and a concrete resource ("VPS/database MONA Cloud"), so it is clearly the inverse of the sibling cloud_service_start. It is unambiguous but does not name any sibling explicitly for disambiguation.

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?

"luôn cho phép dừng để người dùng hạn chế chi phí" gives a rationale (cost control) that implies when to use it, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not, no prerequisites, and no routing to cloud_service_rebuild or vibecloud_stop alternatives.

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