Stop HTB Machine

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds real substance beyond that: it specifies what is destroyed ('kills the running box and its state') and mandates user confirmation. It stops short of describing post-stop state or error behavior if no active machine exists.

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 tight sentences, zero filler, with the destructive nature front-loaded so the agent sees the risk before the mechanics.

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?

Covers the destructive effect, the parameter default, and the safety gate — adequate for a one-parameter mutation tool with no output schema. Minor gap: no mention of failure behavior when no active machine exists or a target is invalid.

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 the single parameter's default behavior is already documented in the schema ('omit to stop the active machine'). The description restates that default rather than adding syntax or format detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('Stop (terminate) a machine') with a clarifying synonym, and is unambiguously distinct from siblings like htb_machine_start, htb_machine_reset, and htb_machine_extend. An agent can route to it without opening the schema.

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?

Gives the condition for the omitted parameter ('defaults to the currently active machine when target is omitted') and a clear pre-call precondition ('confirm with the user before calling'). It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the context is unambiguous.

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