bernstein_shutdown_orchestrator

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It explains the mechanism (writes a signal file) and graceful shutdown, but does not explicitly state that all runs and workers are terminated irreversibly. This is a minor gap given the destructive nature of the tool.

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 brief yet comprehensive, front-loading the core purpose and mechanism. Every sentence adds value: the main action, the alternative, the implementation detail, and the parameter. No wasted words.

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 optional parameter and an output schema (confirmation message), the description covers all essential aspects: what it does, how it works, the parameter, and return value. It is complete for an agent to use correctly.

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 0%, so the description must fully explain the parameter. It does so by specifying 'workdir: Project root directory (default: current directory)', adding meaning beyond the schema about the parameter's role and default value.

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 it shuts down the entire Bernstein orchestrator for the project, distinguishing it from the sibling tool bernstein_cancel which stops a single run. The verb 'shut down' and resource 'orchestrator' are specific and unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (shut down entire orchestrator) and when not to use (for a single run, use bernstein_cancel). Provides clear context and a named alternative, making the intended usage precise.

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