typora_restart

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is partly covered. The description adds genuinely new context beyond them: the restart is bounded to MCP-launched instances and will not touch externally launched instances that may hold unsaved work. It stops short of stating that unsaved changes in the MCP-launched instance itself may be lost, which the destructive hint implies.

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 sentences, zero waste, with the scope constraint front-loaded in the first sentence and the safety guarantee second. Nothing extra to trim.

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 zero-parameter action tool with no output schema, the description covers what the agent needs to decide and invoke correctly. The main residual gap is what happens to unsaved work in the MCP-launched instance being restarted, and what the call returns.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies; no parameter semantics are missing.

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 (restart) and resource (Typora instance) plus an explicit scope boundary: only instances launched by this MCP server. This distinguishes it implicitly from typora_launch/typora_close, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with those siblings.

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 scope condition ('only a Typora instance launched by this MCP server') tells the agent when this tool is applicable and when it is not, which is the key selection criterion. It stops short of naming a specific alternative tool for the excluded case, so it isn't a full 5.

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