Docker restart

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

The annotation already marks this as destructive (destructiveHint: true), so the description doesn't need to repeat that. It adds the 10s timeout, which is useful but not comprehensive. It doesn't explicitly state that restarting stops and then starts the container, which would imply downtime. Given the annotation covers the destructive nature, the description provides only a minor behavioral detail, so a 3 is appropriate.

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, efficient sentence that states the operation first and the timeout parenthetically. No wasted words; it is appropriately concise and front-loaded.

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 tool with an output schema and a single parameter, the description is too sparse. It doesn't provide usage context (when to use vs. stop/start), doesn't mention that the container will be stopped and restarted, and doesn't clarify the parameter format. Even though the output schema exists, the description leaves the agent with gaps about invocation and side effects.

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 coverage is 0% and the description only says 'Restart a container,' which implies the parameter is the container but doesn't specify whether it's an ID, name, or how to format it. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema's bare 'container' string field. For a single-parameter tool, more detail (e.g., 'Provide the container ID or name') would be expected.

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 action ('Restart') and the target ('a container'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings like docker_start, docker_stop, and docker_rm by the specific verb. The timeout note adds a useful detail without confusing the core purpose.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as docker_stop followed by docker_start. It doesn't mention scenarios (e.g., container unresponsive) or why restart is preferred over stop/start. The agent is left to infer usage from the name alone.

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