coolify_restart_application

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly labels the operation as '[DESTRUCTIVE]' and notes it causes brief downtime, which is critical behavioral context. It does not mention any authentication or authorization needs, but the destructive label and downtime warning cover key expectations for a restart 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, with only two short sentences that are front-loaded with the most critical info ([DESTRUCTIVE], restart action). Every word adds value, and there is no redundancy.

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 restart tool with no output schema and only two parameters (both fully documented in schema), the description adequately covers purpose, behavioral impact, and a key constraint (downtime). It does not explain what happens on success/failure or how to confirm the operation, but these are covered by the confirm parameter. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for the tool's simplicity.

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%, with detailed schema descriptions for uuid (pattern, length) and confirm (boolean flag). The description does not add any extra semantics beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 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 clearly states the tool restarts a Coolify application, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like coolify_start_application and coolify_stop_application by implying a restart (stop then start). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling coolify_restart_database, which is for a different resource type.

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 mentions 'causes brief downtime', which warns about usage context but does not explicitly state when to use this vs alternatives like coolify_start_application (for initial starting) or coolify_stop_application (for stopping). No exclusions or alternatives are named.

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