relaunch_server

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly discloses the key side effect: the call interrupts running jobs. It also clarifies the required prior state. It does not mention response format or server availability during the relaunch, but the most important behaviors are covered.

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 dense sentences carry the action, purpose, endpoint, precondition, and side-effect warning. Information is front-loaded and there is 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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, endpoint, when to call, and major side effects. It could be slightly stronger by naming the generic restart_server alternative, but nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema is trivially complete. The description adds useful context about update semantics and preconditions, meeting the baseline for a zero-parameter tool.

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 uses a specific verb ('Relaunch'), names the resource ('Tdarr Server'), and states the exact purpose ('to finish applying a downloaded update'). It also includes the endpoint, which makes the tool's role unambiguous and distinguishes it from generic restart tools.

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?

The description gives an explicit precondition: 'Only call this after check_for_update reported the update as applied.' It also warns that the call interrupts running jobs. It does not explicitly name an alternative like restart_server for non-update restarts, so it stops just short of full alternative guidance.

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