Stop container (force)

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

Annotations indicate this is not read-only (modifies state), not idempotent, and not destructive. The description adds context by specifying 'hard-stop' and 'immediate power off', which clarifies the forceful nature but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., data loss). Since the annotations already cover basic behavioral traits, the description provides only incremental value.

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, focused sentence that conveys the core action efficiently. It is front-loaded with the key information. While it is brief, it avoids unnecessary elaboration, earning a high score for conciseness.

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?

Given that this is a state-changing operation with no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks information about return values, error conditions, prerequisites, or the consequences of a hard stop. For a mutation tool, more completeness is expected.

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 two required parameters ('node' and 'vmid') with basic type/pattern constraints but no descriptions. The tool description does not explain the parameters at all, despite the schema coverage being 0%. This leaves the agent without necessary context for parameter specification.

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 action ('Hard-stop'/'immediate power off') and the resource ('the container'). It effectively distinguishes the tool from siblings like shutdown_container (graceful) and restart_container (stop then start) by emphasizing the forceful nature.

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 that this tool is for a hard, immediate stop rather than a graceful shutdown, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., shutdown_container) or warn against using it in certain scenarios. The guidance is implied but not explicit.

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