service_restart

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

描述披露了写入操作、非幂等性和重复调用会中断服务，这些信息在annotations中未提及（annotations仅有destructiveHint），补充了关键行为。但没有说明权限要求或返回格式等，不过仍有实质增量。

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?

两句话简洁明了，第一句说明功能和写入性质，第二句补充参数和幂等性，没有冗余，信息密度高。结构合理，关键信息前置。

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?

有输出schema但内容未知，描述中通过引用service_start的返回结构提供间接说明。但confirm参数如何填写（如需要什么值）未说明，依赖外部定义，整体完整性一般。

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覆盖率为0%，描述指出'参数与返回结构同service_start'，提供了参考路径但未直接解释每个参数。对于已知service_start的用户有帮助，但独立使用仍显不足，因此评分中等。

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?

描述以'重启指定服务'开头，明确动词和对象，并注明是写入操作。但未直接说明与service_start、service_stop的区别，如重启与先停再起的差别，因此未完全区分开兄弟工具，但基本清晰。

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?

提到'需二次确认'暗示应谨慎使用，且强调非幂等和重复中断，提供了使用时的注意事项。但未明确说明何时应该用restart而不是start或stop，也没有排除场景。

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