initiate_roll

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It starts with 'DESTRUCTIVE:' and explains the batch drain-and-replace process. It mentions required confirm parameter as safety guard. However, it does not disclose whether the operation is synchronous or async, or how to monitor progress.

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 relatively long but well-organized: begins with a destructive warning, a one-line summary, then a structured parameter list. Each parameter line is concise. Could be slightly more concise but the structure aids scanning.

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 tool's complexity (destructive, 9 params, no annotations, output schema exists), the description is fairly complete. It explains all parameters, the destructive nature, and safety requirements. It lacks details on rollback or monitoring, but the output schema may cover return values.

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 0%, so the description must fully explain parameters. It provides a detailed docstring-style list for all 9 parameters, including defaults, examples (e.g., cluster_id 'o-abc12345', launch_spec_ids 'ols-abc,ols-def'), and meaning (e.g., confirm is safety guard). This adds significant value beyond the schema's basic titles and types.

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 'Initiate a rolling restart of nodes in an Ocean cluster', specifying the verb (initiate), resource (rolling restart), and scope (Ocean cluster). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_roll, list_rolls, and other mutation tools by explicitly mentioning 'rolling restart' and 'drain and replace nodes in batches'.

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 confirm=true is required as a safety guard, implying use when intentional rolling restart is needed. It does not explicitly exclude when not to use or compare to alternatives like detach_instances, but the unique action of batch rolling restart is clear.

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