stellar_container_stop

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It does not state whether stopping is reversible, what happens to container state or data, whether the operation is idempotent, or what permissions are required. The only behavioral context added is that the container should have been started via the corresponding start tool.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It states the action and lifecycle relationship immediately.

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 simple two-parameter stop tool with a fully described schema and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it omits operational details such as idempotency and side effects, leaving a clear gap in behavioral completeness.

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%, and both optional parameters are already documented in the schema, including the 'name' default of 'local' and the 'dockerHost' override. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 provides a specific verb and resource ('Stop a network container') and explicitly ties it to the lifecycle counterpart ('started with stellar container start'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools such as stellar_container_start and stellar_container_logs.

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 a prerequisite container must have been started, but it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternatives for inspecting or restarting containers. The agent is left to infer the usage context.

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