restart_info

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

The verb 'List' implies a read-only inspection, and the description states that it extracts report steps and keywords from a UNRST file. However, since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden and does not disclose path expectations, error behavior, or whether it only reads the file or also parses additional related files.

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 focused sentence with no filler. The action and output are front-loaded, making it easy for an agent to quickly parse the tool's core function.

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 listing tool with an output schema, the description is minimally adequate, but it still leaves important gaps: the meaning of case_path in relation to the UNRST file is unexplained, and there is no guidance for choosing this tool over related siblings. The output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but parameter semantics and usage context remain incomplete.

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 provides only 'case_path' with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The tool description never mentions case_path directly, leaving the agent to infer that the path refers to a UNRST file or a case directory that contains one. The exact relationship between case_path and the target UNRST file is ambiguous.

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 (List) and the target resource (a UNRST file), and specifies the output content: report steps and keywords. It is specific enough to understand the tool's purpose, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling restart_property.

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?

There is no guidance about when this tool should be preferred over alternatives such as restart_property, nor any mention of prerequisites or exclusions. The intended use is only implied by the description's content, with no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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