shelly_system_reboot

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the destructiveHint annotation: it specifies that a confirmation parameter is required and that actions are audit-logged. This gives the agent important safety and logging awareness.

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 very short (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core action. However, it may be too brief, omitting necessary parameter explanations, which trades conciseness for completeness.

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 having an output schema, the description fails to document the three input parameters adequately. Given the tool's destructive nature and three parameters, the description lacks essential details like device identification, delay semantics, and confirmation behavior, making it incomplete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should clarify parameter meanings. It only addresses 'confirm' by noting it must be true, but leaves 'device' (required) and 'delay_ms' completely unexplained. No formats, defaults beyond schema, or constraints are provided.

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?

Description clearly states 'Reboot a device' with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like shelly_system_update, which also targets system-level actions, missing a chance to clarify distinct purpose.

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 the requirement 'confirm:true', which serves as a usage prerequisite. However, no guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., shelly_system_update for firmware updates), and no scenarios or exclusions are described.

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