Reboot Server

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds meaningful context: 'This is like pressing the reset button' conveys abruptness and potential for interrupted processes. This goes beyond the annotation flags, though it does not mention specific side effects like unsaved data loss, which would merit a 5.

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?

Extremely concise: two short sentences that are front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a clarifying analogy and an alternative instruction. Every sentence contributes value without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description fully covers purpose, behavior, and usage guidance. It even explains when not to use it. No important context is missing for an agent to invoke it 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?

The schema fully documents the only parameter 'id' as 'The server ID' (100% coverage). The description does not add additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, 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?

States the action clearly: 'Reboot a server (hard reset).' This specifies the verb (reboot), resource (server), and clarifies the method (hard reset), distinguishing it from siblings like power_on_server and power_off_server. The analogy to pressing the reset button reinforces the distinction.

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?

Explicitly provides an alternative: 'For a graceful reboot, SSH into the server and run reboot.' This tells the agent when to use this tool (hard reset needed) and when not to (graceful reboot preferred), effectively differentiating from other lifecycle tools.

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