A tall thin print risks two different kinds of tipping
A vase, a figurine, or a thin sign can be knocked over during printing by the print head's own vibration and travel moves, and the finished part can just as easily tip over sitting on a shelf once it is done. Both risks come from the same underlying geometry, a lot of height relative to a small base, but they happen at different times and are addressed differently: print-time risk is about bed adhesion and vibration, finished-part risk is about the object's real-world center of gravity and where it gets placed.
How the check works
Height is compared against the narrowest footprint dimension to get an aspect ratio, and a lighter part is weighted as more tip-prone than a heavier one at the same ratio, since a heavier base resists a nudge better. The result names both the print-time consideration (whether a brim or raft is worth adding) and the finished-part consideration (whether the design itself needs a wider base) rather than treating them as one problem.
Worked example
A 180 mm tall part on a 25 mm footprint, about 15 g, no adhesion aid planned: the roughly 7:1 height-to-footprint ratio combined with a light mass lands in the high-concern band, so the tool recommends adding a brim during printing and reconsidering whether the finished part's own base needs widening or weighting to stand reliably once placed.
A common mistake
A frequent error is addressing print-time stability with a brim but never revisiting whether the finished part itself actually stands reliably once placed in its intended location. A part that printed successfully with a brim can still tip over easily on a shelf if its own design is inherently top-heavy; the two stability questions need separate answers.
Limitations
This uses height, footprint, and mass as a rough stability proxy, not a true center-of-mass or dynamic stability simulation. It cannot see your printer's specific vibration behavior or exactly how or where the finished part will be placed and used.