shutdown_guest

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description adds behavioral context: it explains the guest OS is asked to power off and that force_stop can hard-stop if shutdown times out. This aids understanding of the tool's effect and fallback behavior.

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 compact and well-structured: two sentences plus an Args list. Every sentence adds value, with no fluff or repetition of schema details.

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 shutdown tool with an output schema, the description covers key aspects: what it does, how it behaves, and parameter semantics. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke correctly without additional context.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description's Args section fully explains each parameter: vmid identifies the guest, timeout is the wait time, and force_stop triggers a hard stop. This adds meaning beyond the raw schema, which only lists types and defaults.

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 the action: 'Gracefully shut down a VM or container.' It specifies the resource type (VM/container) and the method (asking the guest OS to power off), making it distinct from siblings like stop_guest or reboot_guest.

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 clear context by emphasizing 'gracefully' and 'asking the guest OS,' which implies ideal use for clean shutdowns. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when to prefer stop_guest, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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