shutdown_simulator

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavior. It does not mention side effects, prerequisites (e.g., simulator must be booted), or what happens when parameters are omitted or both provided. This is a significant gap for a tool that mutates simulator state.

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 front-loads the action and resource. It contains no filler or repetition, making it highly efficient.

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 tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core functionality. However, it leaves ambiguity around edge cases (no args, both args, or none booted), so it's adequate but not complete.

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% for both parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description only restates the parameter purposes without adding new meaning, such as precedence rules between 'all' and 'udid' or the default behavior when neither is set.

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 specifies the action ('Shutdown') and the resource ('simulator'), with explicit dual modes: by UDID or all running simulators. This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like boot_simulator or reset_simulator.

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 usage (when you need to stop simulators) but does not provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance or mention alternatives. It lacks context such as 'use reset_simulator for a clean state' or 'boot_simulator to restart after shutdown'.

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