shutdown_daemon

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=true, but the description adds meaningful behavioral context: 'Every torrent stops and the daemon exits. Nothing here can start it again.' This clearly communicates the full destructive scope and irreversibility within the toolset.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the action directly, and the second sentence adds the key consequences and caution. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

With zero parameters, an existing output schema, and annotations covering idempotency and destructiveness, the description supplies the missing behavioral context: all torrents stop, the daemon exits, and nothing in this toolset can restart it. The agent has everything needed to decide whether to call this tool.

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 tool has zero parameters and the input schema is empty, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly focuses on behavior rather than parameter details, and no parameter explanation is needed.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Shut the Transmission daemon down.' It also clarifies the effect by stating 'the daemon exits,' which distinguishes it from sibling tools like stop_torrents that only stop torrents without shutting down the daemon.

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 intended use is implied by the action and consequence: this is the tool for completely ending the Transmission daemon. However, it never explicitly states when to use this over alternatives, nor does it mention stop_torrents or other less destructive options, so the usage guidance is only implied.

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