Restart a machine by ID via the VCF Automation IaaS API to recover from issues or complete maintenance tasks.
Restart operation for machine Second day restart operation for machine POST /iaas/api/machines/{id}/operations/restart
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | The id of the Machine. (path) | |
| apiVersion | No | The version of the API in yyyy-MM-dd format (UTC). For versioning information refer to /iaas/api/about |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already disclose readOnly=false, idempotent=false, openWorld=true, and destructive=false. The description adds little beyond restating that this is a restart operation and showing the POST endpoint. It does not mention downtime, asynchronous behavior, required permissions, or what the operation returns.
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 short and front-loaded, but the phrase 'Second day restart operation for machine' is redundant and unclear. The endpoint line is useful but the middle line does not earn its place.
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?
This is a mutation operation with no output schema and no explanation of whether restart is asynchronous or returns a task/operation. It also fails to differentiate the operation from sibling tools like reboot and reset. Given the potential impact of restarting a machine, more operational context is needed.
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 both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning about the machine id or apiVersion beyond the endpoint template.
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 states a specific verb and resource: restart a machine. The endpoint path reinforces the resource. However, it does not distinguish this operation from closely related siblings such as iaas_reboot_machine or iaas_reset_machine.
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 restart versus reboot, reset, power off, or shutdown. It only identifies the operation and endpoint, leaving selection entirely to the tool name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.