restart_container

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool is a write operation with medium risk, captures prior state, has no meaningful inverse, and supports dry_run. This is transparent about the mutating nature and safety, though it could mention permissions or failure modes.

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 concise with a risk tag, summary, behavioral note, and structured Args block. No extraneous content, but the informal '[WRITE][risk=medium]' could be cleaner. Overall efficient and well-organized.

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?

Despite no annotations or output schema, the description covers the tool's action, risk profile, parameters, and dry_run feature. It lacks return value details and error handling, but for a simple restart operation, it provides sufficient context for an agent to use correctly.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description provides detailed parameter documentation: container_id, timeout (with default and unit), dry_run (with effect), and target (with usage context). This adds essential meaning beyond the schema's raw type information.

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 that the tool restarts a container and captures prior state for audit. It uses specific verbs and resources ('Restart a container') and distinguishes from siblings like start/stop by highlighting audit logging. The no-undo behavior is explicitly stated.

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 implicitly indicates usage for restarting containers with audit needs, and mentions dry_run for preview. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like stop+start or when not to use this tool. The context of audit logging provides some guidance.

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