stop_vm

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions the force option and its effect (force stop without graceful shutdown) but does not disclose potential data loss, permission requirements, or whether the operation is reversible. Some behavioral context is present, but gaps remain.

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, with only three sentences for the main description plus an Args/Returns section. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. However, the structure could be slightly improved with clearer separation of lines.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (two parameters, no enums, minimal output), the description covers the key points: purpose, parameter details, and return format. It could mention prerequisites (e.g., VM must exist) or side effects, but overall it is sufficient for a basic operation.

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%, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by specifying the format for vm_id (provider:tenant:region:instance_id) and explaining the force parameter's default and effect. This helps an agent understand parameter usage beyond type constraints.

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 'Stop a virtual machine,' which is a specific verb-resource pair. It distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like start_vm and reboot_vm, as stopping is a distinct operation.

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 when to use the tool (to stop a VM) but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use force vs. graceful stop, nor does it differentiate from alternatives like reboot_vm or start_vm. Missing context for usage scenarios.

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