restart_compose

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and discloses nothing: no statement about downtime, whether the compose stack is recreated, whether data persists, or what permissions are needed for a mutation operation.

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?

Extremely short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness — there is no front-loaded intent or detail beyond the name. Nothing here earns its place because nothing is conveyed.

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 state-changing operation on a compose stack with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented required parameter, the description is wholly inadequate. An agent cannot determine effect, return value, or failure behavior.

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?

One required parameter with 0% schema description coverage and the description says nothing about it. It is unclear whether 'id' is a compose ID, a numeric index, or a name, leaving the agent unable to supply a valid value with confidence.

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?

"Restart compose" is essentially a restatement of the tool name with no added detail. It doesn't distinguish itself from the numerous siblings (start_compose, stop_compose, remove_compose) beyond the verb, so an agent must guess at scope and effect.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of the obvious alternatives (start_compose/stop_compose). The agent gets no signal about what condition should select restart over a stop/start pair.

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