Restart container

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

Annotations already communicate that this is a state-changing, non-idempotent operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that, such as service interruption, impact on running processes, or required container state.

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 short, but the two sentences are redundant: 'Restart container' and 'Restarts a specific container' say nearly the same thing. It is under-specified rather than effectively concise.

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?

With no output schema, no parameter descriptions, and no mention of session prerequisites or side effects, the description is not sufficient for an agent to confidently invoke the tool in the right context. It provides only the bare action name.

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 0% and the description does not explain either parameter. 'containerId' is weakly implied by 'specific container,' but 'sessionId' is completely unexplained, leaving the agent to guess its role.

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 names the action ('restart') and resource ('container') clearly, and adds that it targets a specific container. It is distinguishable from sibling lifecycle tools at a basic level, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like start_container, stop_container, or pause_container. No prerequisites such as an active session or existing container are mentioned.

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