simctl_shutdown_device

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

With no annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action and return value ('Success message'), but does not describe side effects (e.g., state saving) or error conditions for already shutdown devices.

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 concise (two sentences) and uses an Args/Returns structure. It is front-loaded with the action. Minor improvement could be to separate the parameter description into a bullet for clarity.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It explains the parameter and return value but lacks error handling details and use-case differentiation.

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 no description for the 'device' parameter. The description adds valuable context by specifying that it accepts a UDID, name, or 'booted'. Since schema coverage is 0%, this compensates well.

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 ('Shutdown') and the resource ('simulator device'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like simctl_boot_device and simctl_delete_device by focusing specifically on shutdown.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use shutdown versus other lifecycle operations. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., device must be booted) or what to do if the device is already shut down.

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