remnawave_nodes_restart

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only labels the tool as a 'mutation' but omits critical details such as side effects (e.g., user disconnections, traffic interruption), required permissions, or return behavior. This is severely inadequate for a mutation tool.

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 extremely short (one sentence, 3 meaningful words), but it is under-specified rather than concise. Every sentence does not earn its place because it fails to convey essential information about the tool's operation.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It fails to explain the effect of restarting nodes, the expected input format, or the outcome. The agent cannot reliably determine how to invoke or what to expect from this tool.

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% for 4 parameters, and the description adds no explanation for 'payload', 'confirmToken', 'responseMode', or 'mutationApproved'. The agent receives no help understanding their purpose or valid values beyond the schema's basic types and enums.

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 'Remnawave nodes.restart (mutation).' essentially restates the tool's name ('remnawave_nodes_restart') and labels it as a mutation. It fails to specify what restarting a node entails or to distinguish it from siblings like 'remnawave_nodes_restart_all', which is a clear alternative. The purpose is vague and tautological.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'remnawave_nodes_restart_all' or 'remnawave_nodes_disable/enable'. There is no context about prerequisites, when a restart is appropriate, or when other tools should be preferred.

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