homebutler

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It fails to disclose that this is a destructive/interruptive operation causing downtime, whether it works on stopped containers, or what happens if the container doesn't exist.

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?

Extremely concise at 6 words with no redundancy or filler. However, it may be overly terse for an operational tool; one sentence on side effects would improve utility without sacrificing clarity.

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 2-parameter tool with 100% schema coverage, the description covers the basic action. However, given the lack of annotations and the operational nature (service interruption), it omits critical behavioral context that would help an agent understand impact and error scenarios.

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 coverage is 100%, establishing a baseline of 3. The description mentions 'by name' which aligns with the 'name' parameter, but adds no additional semantics beyond the schema (e.g., no format guidance, regex, or details on the optional 'server' parameter behavior).

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?

Clearly states the specific verb (restart) and resource (Docker container). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling 'docker_stop' (e.g., noting that restart stops then starts the container, whereas stop only stops it).

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this versus 'docker_stop' or prerequisites (e.g., container must exist). No mention of error conditions or if the container must be running.

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