shutdown

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It clearly states the core action but gives no details on consequences (e.g., whether it is graceful, irreversible, or affects ongoing tasks). This is adequate for a simple shutdown but lacks depth.

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 no filler or irrelevant information. Every word contributes to its meaning.

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?

The description is complete for a zero-parameter shutdown tool, especially given the presence of an output schema. It could mention the relaunch path or the finality of the action, but these are not essential for invocation.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the input schema is empty. As per the baseline for 0-param tools, the description does not need to add parameter-level detail, and it appropriately stays silent.

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 states a specific verb ('Shut down') and a specific resource ('the openclaw-brain agent'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like 'startup'. There is no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 the tool is used to stop the agent, and the sibling 'startup' provides the inverse context. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it or mention alternatives, earning a 4 rather than a 5.

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