panelica_python_apps_post_v1_python_apps_id_restart

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

Annotations already mark this as non-readonly and non-idempotent; the description adds value by stating 'Mutating: changes server state' and the required apps:write scope. It doesn't disclose the operational side effect of a restart (e.g., brief app downtime) or any asynchronous behavior, so transparency is adequate but not rich.

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 four short lines with the action front-loaded. Every line (HTTP path, category, scope, mutation flag) carries useful information, with no repetition or 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 simple endpoint it covers method, path, category, required scopes, and mutation, and the schema covers the required id parameter. But there is no output schema and the description does not explain what response to expect or what a restart actually does beyond 'changes server state,' leaving it minimally complete.

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%: id is described as the path parameter and body as an optional JSON request body, so the schema carries the parameter meaning. The description adds no further parameter detail and leaves the body schema unresolved.

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 explicitly says 'Restart app' and reinforces it with the HTTP method/path and 'Category: Python Apps,' so an agent can identify this as a Python-app restart action. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling start/stop or Node.js restart tools, which keeps it one step below full differentiation.

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 Category line and the /python/apps/:id/restart endpoint imply when the tool should be used, and 'Required scopes: apps:write' conveys a prerequisite. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over the sibling restart/start/stop tools or when not to use it.

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