Stop Service

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description's real contribution is the '(sudo)' note, which discloses that elevated privileges are required - information not present in the annotations or schema. It does not, however, say anything about dependent services or reversibility.

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?

Two terse, front-loaded sentences with zero filler; the verb and resource come first and the scoping caveat follows.

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 one-parameter mutation tool with complete schema coverage, a safety-related annotation, and no output schema, the description supplies the essential privilege context an agent needs. Only minor gaps remain around behavior when the service is already stopped or has dependents.

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 single parameter 'name' is fully documented in the schema ('Service name'), so the baseline is 3. The description's 'System scope only' adds a mild constraint on which names are valid, but no format or examples are provided.

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?

States a specific verb (Stop) and resource (system service), and the '(sudo)' plus 'System scope only' qualifiers add precision about what is being stopped. It is clearly distinguishable from service_start/service_restart/service_disable, though it does not name a sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by the name and the scope note, but there is no statement of when to prefer this over service_disable or service_restart, nor any prerequisite or failure-condition guidance.

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