docker_stop

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosure. It only states the action without mentioning behavioral details such as container state changes (running to stopped), signal handling, or potential errors if the container is not running. The description is minimal and does not enrich the agent's understanding beyond the literal verb.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys the action and target. It contains no superfluous words or repetition, earning perfect marks for efficiency.

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 tool is simple with one well-documented parameter and an output schema, so the description plus schema adequately cover the essential invocation details. However, it lacks contextual notes about container lifecycle (e.g., that a stopped container still exists), which could be valuable but is not strictly necessary.

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 fully describes the only parameter 'container' as 'The container name or ID.' (100% coverage). The description adds no extra meaning for the parameter, so the schema already carries the semantic load, yielding a baseline score of 3.

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 'Stop a running container.' uses a specific verb ('Stop') and resource ('container'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like docker_remove_container (which removes) and docker_run (which starts). It is unambiguous and directly states the tool's function.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that docker_stop is only for running containers, nor does it suggest docker_remove_container for deleting a container after stopping. There is no context or exclusion criteria.

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