restart_notebook

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It mentions clearing packages and variables, but omits potential side effects like unsaved data loss, impact on running executions, or authentication requirements. The presence of an output schema is not leveraged.

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?

A single, clear sentence that gets straight to the point with no extraneous words. Front-loaded with the primary action.

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?

Given the low parameter count and presence of output schema, the description is adequate but lacks details on prerequisites (e.g., notebook must be connected), return value, and when to use. Leaves some gaps for an agent.

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 compensate. It only says 'specified Notebook' without adding format, example, or context for the single required parameter 'notebook_name'. No value beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the action: 'Restart the kernel' and the resource: 'a specified Notebook', and specifies what it does: 'clear all imported packages and variables'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like connect_notebook or execute_cell.

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 for clearing state but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., execute_temporary_code for isolated code, or read_notebook for inspection). No when-not-to-use guidance.

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