stop_instance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It only names the action; it does not disclose what 'stopping' entails (graceful vs forced shutdown), whether it is reversible via start_instance, whether it is asynchronous (get_operation exists as a sibling), or what state the VM ends up in.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, appropriately short for a one-parameter tool. The brevity reflects under-specification more than deliberate economy, which keeps it from a 5.

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 state-changing tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits reversibility (start_instance sibling), potential async behavior (get_operation sibling), and state requirements, leaving an agent without enough context to invoke it correctly and interpret the outcome.

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 100%: the sole parameter instance_id is documented as 'ID виртуальной машины для остановки', so the schema fully carries the parameter meaning. The description adds no parameter detail, but the baseline 3 applies because the schema covers it entirely.

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 'Остановить виртуальную машину' (Stop the virtual machine) states a specific verb and resource in natural language. It clarifies that 'instance' refers to a virtual machine, and the verb 'stop' clearly differentiates it from the sibling start_instance. It is minimal and essentially restates the tool name's meaning, but the core purpose is 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?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings such as start_instance, list_instances, or get_instance. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as the VM needing to be in a running state, nor any exclusions or alternative conditions.

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