system_reboot

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

Even though annotations already include destructiveHint:true, the description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: it disconnects the guest, requires configured autostart for recovery, and leaves the VM locked by the current session. It also provides a clear follow-up action (vm_unlock). No contradiction with 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?

The description is two concise sentences with no fluff. The first sentence states the core action, and the second covers essential consequences and follow-up. Every word adds value.

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 destructive reboot operation, the description covers purpose, disconnect side-effect, recovery prerequisite, and the need to unlock afterward. However, it omits any explanation of the force and delay_seconds parameters, and there is no output schema. It is complete for the core behavior but not fully comprehensive.

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 input schema has two parameters (force and delay_seconds) with 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not explain either. The parameter names are self-explanatory to a degree, but the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema description, leaving the meaning and implications of 'force' and 'delay_seconds' ambiguous.

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 starts with 'Reboot Windows 98', a specific verb and target that clearly states the action and resource. It also differentiates from the sibling tool system_shutdown by indicating a reboot (not a shutdown) and includes the guest-disconnect consequence.

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 gives clear context: it disconnects the guest, requires configured autostart for recovery, and notes that the VM remains locked by this session, directing the user to call vm_unlock when finished. It does not explicitly name alternatives like system_shutdown, but the usage context is clear enough.

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