mcp_agent_restart

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that this is a mutating operation and that reboot is platform-conditional (honored only on real Raspberry Pi, silently ignored on Mac/dev where a process restart occurs instead). It does not mention downtime, whether in-flight work is lost, permissions, or reversibility.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and immediately followed by the optional parameter's special semantics. No filler.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description should carry more: it omits what happens to the agent's connections/state during restart, whether the call waits for the process to come back, and any return or error behavior. Adequate for a simple 2-param tool but not complete.

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 compensate. It explains the `reboot` boolean well, including its platform-dependent semantics and fallback behavior, but says nothing about the format or expected value of the required `agent` parameter (name vs. id).

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 gives a specific verb and resource (restart the agent's server process) and scopes the target agent via the `agent` parameter. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like mcp_agent_upgrade, mcp_agent_logs, or mcp_agents_list without opening any 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?

The description explains the conditional use of reboot=true, which implicitly frames two modes of operation, but it never states when an agent should be restarted rather than upgraded or inspected via mcp_agent_logs. Usage is implied rather than guided.

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