Restart the League Client UX

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

Adds substantial context beyond the annotations: it discloses the destructive effect ('severs active CDP and WebSocket connections'), explains what waitForReady does (polling until LCU HTTP API and CDP page target are restored), and states the prerequisite that Riot Client and LCU must be running. This matches and enriches the destructiveHint/openWorldHint annotations rather than contradicting them.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then use-cases, exclusions, behavior, and prerequisite in a tight sequence. Slightly dense (a long parenthetical and a 'Behavior:' clause), but each sentence carries distinct routing or behavioral value.

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 destructive mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the action, its side effects, the sibling alternative, the recovery semantics of waitForReady, and the required prerequisites. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters (waitForReady, timeoutSeconds) are already fully documented in the schema, establishing a baseline of 3. The description restates waitForReady's polling behavior but adds no syntax or default information beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Terminate and relaunch the League Client user interface frontend (Chromium Embedded Framework renderers)') with the mechanism (Riot Client API). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from lol_workflow_* siblings, so an agent can route without opening the schema.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use cases (frozen client UI, apply Pengu Loader plugin changes, reload corrupted UI states) and names the alternative for a different goal ('For gameflow or lobby navigation, use lol_workflow_* tools instead'). Nothing is left to inference.

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