restart_device

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses that the command is persisted on the console, the device goes offline briefly and reconnects, and this operation power-cycles the device. This gives the agent a concrete model of the tool's runtime impact.

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 compact and front-loaded: purpose, impact, sibling contrast, then argument details. Every sentence adds distinct operational value, with no filler or repetition.

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 3-param mutating tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what happens, how to set the arguments, the defaults, and the alternatives. An agent has enough context to invoke the tool correctly and anticipate the outcome.

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%, and the Args section largely restates what the schema already says. It adds no significant new param meaning beyond the structured schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 opening line states a specific verb and resource: 'Restart (reboot) a UniFi device by MAC address.' It also differentiates itself from siblings by explicitly naming provision_device and upgrade_device, so an agent can identify this as the power-cycle operation.

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 explicitly contrasts this tool with provision_device ('re-push config without reboot') and upgrade_device ('firmware update'), making the when-to-use decision clear. It also states 'No other config change is needed,' preventing unnecessary follow-up actions.

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