create_reinstall_task

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds specificity by noting it wipes server disks, and it discloses the return value (reinstall_key). It reinforces and elaborates on the destructive nature without contradicting annotations.

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?

Three sentences with no fluff, front-loaded with the step-1 role, and includes the destructive warning prominently. Every sentence carries essential information.

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?

The description explains the tool's output (reinstall_key) and its role in the reinstall flow, making it complete for a 2-parameter tool. Minor gap: it does not mention prerequisites or when not to use, but given the simplicity, it is adequate.

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 parameters id and confirm are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no extra parameter details, which matches the baseline of 3 for high schema 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 clearly states the tool creates a master key for OS reinstall (eq/reinstall), explicitly naming it as Step 1 of PXE reinstall. It distinguishes itself from siblings by mentioning the return key used by check_task, making its role unambiguous.

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 frames the tool as Step 1 of a process and references check_task for tracking, implying the intended sequence. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the step-1 designation provides clear usage context.

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