restart_db_instance

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions idempotency via client_token and return type, but fails to disclose side effects like downtime, data loss risk, or whether the instance must be running.

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 concise and well-structured with Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value, though it could be slightly more streamlined.

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?

Covers parameters well and mentions return type. However, missing context such as prerequisites (e.g., instance state) or behavioral notes on restart impact. Output schema exists, so return description 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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description adds critical meaning: it explains effective_time options, switch_time format requirement, and client_token constraints. This compensates fully for the lacking schema descriptions.

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 ('Restart an RDS instance') with a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_db_instance or describe_db_instances, which perform different operations.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., modify_db_instance_spec). The description does not mention prerequisites or when not to use it, lacking comparative context.

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