reboot_service

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It explicitly states 'Plain write — no billing impact, not destructive' and mentions required scope. It could mention temporary downtime, but that is implied by rebooting.

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 sentences, no wasted words. Every sentence adds essential information: action, scope, impact, and parameter provenance.

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 reboot tool with no output schema, the description adequately informs the agent. It might benefit from mentioning return format, but given the context of sibling tools and the simplicity of the operation, it's sufficient.

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 schema covers 100% of the single parameter. The description adds value by noting that service_id comes from list_services, reinforcing the parameter's source.

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 clearly states the action ('Reboot') and the specific resource ('service (cloud VM or legacy VPS)'), and distinguishes from sibling tools like stop_service, start_service, destroy_service.

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 specifies the required scope (services:write) and that it's a plain write with no billing impact or destructiveness. It also instructs to get the service_id from list_services. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives like start_service or stop_service, which would clarify when to use reboot.

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