ps_restart

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool 'manages process restarts with flexible targeting options' which implies mutation/destructive behavior, but doesn't explicitly state whether this causes downtime, requires specific permissions, or has rate limits. The description adequately conveys the core action but lacks operational details.

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 efficiently structured with a clear opening statement followed by a numbered list of use cases and a summary sentence. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant information or unnecessary elaboration.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description does a good job explaining what the tool does and when to use it. However, it lacks information about potential side effects (downtime, data loss), authentication requirements, or what the tool returns. Given the complexity of a restart operation, some additional behavioral context would be beneficial.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by mentioning 'flexible targeting options' and listing the four restart scenarios, but doesn't provide additional parameter semantics or usage examples beyond what's in the schema descriptions.

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 the specific action ('Restart Heroku application processes') and resource ('dynos'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like ps_list (list processes) and ps_scale (scale processes). It provides a comprehensive overview of what the tool does beyond just the name.

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 lists four specific use cases when to use this tool (restart specific dynos, restart all dynos of a process type, full application restarts, reset dyno states selectively), providing clear guidance on its intended applications without needing to reference alternatives.

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