coolify_restart_service

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

The description explicitly marks the operation as destructive (via [DESTRUCTIVE] tag) and discloses the brief downtime consequence. Since no annotations are provided, the description fully carries the burden of behavioral disclosure, and it does so clearly and accurately.

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—two short sentences that immediately state the action, its destructive nature, and the impact (brief downtime). Every word earns its place with no filler.

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 2 parameters, 100% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the core behavior and risk. It does not provide post-restart state or error scenarios, but that is reasonable given the tool's simplicity and the existence of sibling tools that return status.

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%: the uuid parameter and confirm parameter already have descriptions in the schema. The description does not add any new information about the parameters, so it earns the baseline score of 3.

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 'Restart a Coolify service' with a specific verb and resource. Among sibling tools, there are also start_service, stop_service, and restart_application, so the description correctly targets services, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from restart_application, which is handled by the tool name itself.

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 provides a warning that it is destructive and causes brief downtime, which implies when to be cautious. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the sibling tools like coolify_restart_application, nor does it mention prerequisites or that the confirm parameter must be set to true.

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