vps_restart_service

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: it warns of a brief service interruption, explains the preview behavior with confirm=false, and states that nothing executes until confirm=true. This complements the destructiveHint and idempotentHint annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: purpose, allowed-scope restriction, interruption warning, and the safe confirmation flow. It is concise, front-loaded, and free of redundant filler.

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 restart operation with no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, what its constraints are, what side effects occur, and the required confirmation workflow. An agent has enough context to invoke it safely and correctly.

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 0%, so the description must explain the parameters. It effectively explains confirm (false/omitted = preview, true = execute) and gives examples of valid service names, plus the ALLOWED_SERVICES constraint. It does not provide a formal parameter mapping, but the prose carries enough meaning for correct invocation.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Restart a system service on the VPS' with concrete examples (nginx, mariadb). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on status, banned IPs, and unbanning.

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 gives explicit usage guidance: only services in ALLOWED_SERVICES can be restarted, and the two-step confirm=false → confirm=true flow is spelled out. It is unambiguous about how and when to use the tool.

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