docker_restart

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It usefully discloses two things annotations would otherwise supply: this is a mutating write action and the MCP client will prompt for approval. It omits operational behavior such as whether the restart is graceful, what happens if the container is stopped or missing, and whether dependent services are affected.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler, with the destructive/prompt-worthy nature front-loaded after the core action. Nothing could be cut without losing 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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the definition covers purpose, mutating nature, and approval behavior. Missing only failure/edge-case behavior (container not running, name not found), which is a minor gap at this complexity level.

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%: both 'host' (with HOMELAB_HOSTS semantics and local-machine default) and 'container' are fully documented in the schema. The description adds nothing about parameters, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Restart a Docker container'), instantly distinguishable from read-only siblings like docker_ps or docker_logs. It does not name any sibling explicitly, though the schema's 'from docker_ps' hint covers that on the parameter side.

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 'WRITE action' framing implies when this tool is appropriate versus read tools, and flags that approval will be requested. However, it names no alternative and gives no conditions such as when to restart a container versus starting or recreating one.

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