container_restart

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations by detailing the STOPSIGNAL behavior, default SIGTERM, SIGKILL after stop_timeout_seconds, the subsequent start, and the self-container refusal. These are meaningful behavioral details not present in readOnlyHint or destructiveHint.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action, then groups behavioral details, the alternative tool, the caveat, and a compact Args/Returns block. Every sentence contributes distinct, useful information with no filler.

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 two-parameter restart operation with no output schema, the description provides the return type, the key timing behavior, and the self-restart limitation. It is only slightly incomplete because the required identifier parameter is not explained and container preconditions are not mentioned.

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 description gives precise meaning for stop_timeout_seconds: seconds between the stop signal and SIGKILL, which is valuable because schema description coverage is 0%. However, the required id_or_name parameter is not described in the Args section, leaving the agent to infer that it takes a container ID or name from the property name and tool context.

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 first sentence defines the verb and resource precisely: restart a container by stopping then starting it in one call. It also distinguishes the tool from container_stop/container_start, making its combined behavior clear.

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?

It explicitly directs the agent to use container_stop/container_start when the halves are needed separately. It also flags the important caveat that a containerized server refuses to restart its own container, which is essential for correct tool selection.

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