Restart Node.js App

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only says 'Restart a Node.js application,' which conveys the basic stop/start action but gives no information about side effects, downtime, required permissions, whether it affects all app instances, or what the response indicates. This is minimal beyond what the tool name already suggests.

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 a single, concise sentence that is instantly scannable. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant phrasing. It is front-loaded with the action and clearly states the target resource.

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 simple restart tool with no annotations, output schema, or complex parameters, this description might suffice at a bare minimum, but it lacks essential context. It does not explain what a 'Node.js application' means in this hosting context, how it relates to other hosting_nodejs tools, or what happens after restart. Given no annotations to fill the gap, the description feels incomplete for a production API 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?

The schema descriptions cover both parameters (username and domain) with clear labels, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter context, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents meaning. No extra semantics are needed.

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 a specific action ('Restart') applied to a specific resource ('a Node.js application'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like vps_restart (for VPS) and vps_docker_restart (for Docker), and aligns with the hosting_nodejs_* family. The verb+resource combination is 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, scenarios (e.g., after deployment or when the app is unresponsive), or exclusions (e.g., not for VPS or Docker restart). Users must infer usage from the tool name and sibling context.

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