system_reboot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the side effect (temporary Internet/Wifi outage), which is the key trait an agent needs, but omits outage duration, whether configuration persists, and whether this requires elevation.

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?

Two short sentences with the action first and the side-effect warning parenthesized. Nothing is redundant or buried.

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 one-parameter, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the definition covers the action, the required guard value, and the main consequence. Only the duration/scope of the outage is left unstated.

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% and the single property is a bare 'Confirm' boolean. The description compensates by stating that `confirm` must be set to true, clarifying the parameter's role beyond the schema, though it does not explain the behavior when false.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource ('Redémarre la box'), so the action is unambiguous. It does not need to distinguish from siblings since none of the listed tools (all status/set operations) perform a reboot.

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 implies usage by stating the `confirm` flag must be true, which effectively tells the agent a guard precondition exists. It gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance relative to alternatives, but for a reboot tool with no sibling there is little to compare against.

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