reload_prometheus_config

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=true, so the description is not the sole source of the safety profile. It nonetheless adds real value beyond them: it flags risk=medium, states "No undo", and discloses that the pre-reload config hash is recorded with rollback via re-applying the prior file.

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?

Front-loads the operation type and risk tag, then covers rollback before listing args. The args block is docstring-styled but every line earns its place; 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 no-output-schema, zero-required-param mutation tool, the description supplies the missing pieces: mutability/risk, reversibility, and per-parameter semantics. What an agent needs to invoke it correctly is present, though it could name a sibling for pre-checks.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it does: it explains that dry_run previews without reloading (reporting the current config hash) and that target selects a Prometheus target name with omission meaning the default. Both parameters are clarified beyond the bare schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Hot-reload the Prometheus config") plus the underlying endpoint (POST /-/reload). It is clearly differentiable from siblings like prometheus_config_status, which only reports state rather than triggering a reload.

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?

Usage is implied (the tool reloads config) and dry_run is offered as a safe preview, but there is no explicit when-to-use-vs-alternatives guidance. It never mentions prometheus_config_status as the read-only alternative for inspecting config state before reloading.

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