Restart PHP

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

Annotations include only openWorldHint, so the description carries most behavioral disclosure. It usefully mentions that the tool returns an operation_id, implying asynchronous execution, but it does not disclose that restarting PHP may be disruptive, whether it requires special permissions, or how to track completion via an operations-status endpoint.

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 with no filler. The action is front-loaded, and the return contract is included. Every word earns 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?

For a simple one-parameter operation with no output schema, the description covers the essential call information: what action to perform, on what resource, and what the response contains. Minor missing context around asynchronous polling prevents a 5, but this is adequate for a straightforward 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 fully describes the single required parameter, environment_id, with a clear description. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond restating the environment context, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 ('Restart'), a specific resource ('PHP'), and a clear target ('for an environment'). It also names the return value, making the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinguishable from siblings like php-version or clear-cache.

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 instead of related operations such as changing the PHP version or clearing cache. The agent must infer usage context from the name alone, which is risky among many similar kinsta_tools_* siblings.

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