start_service

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

Annotations include idempotentHint: true, and the description does not contradict this. The description adds the precondition that the service is stopped, but does not explain behavior on an already-running service, async behavior, or any side effects beyond the annotation.

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 main description is a single clear sentence with no filler. The Args block is somewhat redundant with the input schema, but the overall definition remains compact and front-loaded.

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 simple one-parameter tool with an output schema and idempotentHint, the core purpose is covered. However, there is no guidance about prerequisites beyond 'stopped', no indication of failure behavior, and no mention of when to choose restart_service instead.

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 Args section says only 'service_id: Service ID', which merely restates the schema property name and title. No additional meaning, format, source, or lifecycle context is provided, so the description does not compensate for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 'Start a stopped service' uses a specific verb and resource, and clearly states the target state. It differentiates itself from siblings like stop_service and restart_service by indicating this tool is specifically for starting a stopped service.

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 phrase 'a stopped service' implies the tool should be used when the service is currently stopped. However, no explicit guidance is given about when to prefer start_service over restart_service, or what to do if the service is already running.

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