twincat_restart_runtime

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only states 'start/restart' and the confirm guard. It omits side effects (e.g., stopping running code, disconnecting clients), permission requirements, or error states.

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 with clear purpose and a parameter hint. No fluff, but could include more structured information like usage steps or consequences without adding length.

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 destructive action like restarting runtime, the description is too minimal. It lacks output description, error handling, and context on impact. Schema and annotations do not compensate.

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 schema only specifies parameter 'confirm' as a string. The description adds critical usage context by stating the required value 'ALLOW_TWINCAT_RESTART'. This adds meaning beyond the schema, though it could explain why this guard exists.

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 (start/restart), the resource (TwinCAT runtime), and the location (on the target). It distinguishes from sibling tools like plc_download or twincat_activate_configuration, which have different purposes.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description mentions a guarded confirm parameter, but does not explain prerequisites, context, or when not to use.

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