sim_shutdown

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'shut down' without disclosing side effects like whether running apps are killed, whether the operation is reversible, or if specific permissions are required. The behavioral transparency is minimal.

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 very concise, with two sentences that are to the point. It front-loads the primary action and the key special case. However, its brevity comes at the cost of omitting essential parameter information, though that is more a completeness issue than conciseness.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is incomplete for a tool with 4 parameters, two of which are required and undocumented. An agent would not know what host and user represent or how to fill them. The description only covers udid, leaving the invocation ambiguous.

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%, so the description must explain parameters. It only adds meaning for udid (the 'booted' special value), while host and user are required but completely unexplained, and key_path is also omitted. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 tool shuts down a simulator, and adds the special case of udid='booted' to stop all running ones. This is specific and distinguishes from siblings like sim_terminate or sim_launch, making the purpose 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?

It gives a clear usage tip for the common case of shutting down all simulators via udid='booted'. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternatives such as sim_terminate for app-level termination, 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.