reboot_router

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly identifies the tool as disruptive, requiring write permission, and causing temporary connection loss. This covers key behaviors for a reboot tool, though it might omit minor details like the exact duration of disruption.

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 extremely concise with two short sentences. It front-loads the action and critical requirement, and every word serves a purpose. No unnecessary fluff.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (no parameters, no output schema), the description provides sufficient context: what, prerequisite, and consequence. It could mention expected reboot duration or that it is an immediate action, but overall it is adequate.

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 schema coverage is 100%. According to guidelines, zero parameters earns a baseline of 4. The description does not need to add parameter information, and it does not attempt to mislead.

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 verb 'reboot' and resource 'router' are clear. The description distinctly states the tool's function, and it is the only tool among siblings that performs a router reboot, so there is no confusion.

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 explicitly states that the operation requires 'MIKROCLAW_ALLOW_WRITE=true' and warns about temporary disconnection. While it does not explicitly compare to alternatives, there are no alternative reboot tools among siblings, making the guidance adequate.

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