vsz_reboot_ap

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'Reboot an access point.' It fails to mention the disruptive nature (clients will disconnect, AP goes offline), permission requirements, or any side effects. This is a significant gap for a mutating operation.

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 extremely concise: a single sentence for the purpose plus a clean Args block for parameters. Every word earns its place, and the main verb is front-loaded, making it easy to scan.

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 covers the essential purpose and parameters, and an output schema is present, reducing the need to explain return values. However, it lacks critical context: it does not mention the operational impact (disruptive action) or any prerequisites, making it minimally complete but not fully contextual.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the lack of param documentation. It does so by explicitly defining 'host' as 'vSZ controller IP or hostname' and 'ap_mac' as 'AP MAC address', which fully clarifies both parameters beyond the bare schema field names.

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 'Reboot an access point' using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like vsz_delete_ap, vsz_get_ap, and vsz_update_ap, 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are there any caveats (e.g., 'use when AP is unresponsive'). The only hint is the verb 'reboot', leaving usage entirely implied rather than explicitly stated.

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