restart_vps

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

The description adds the precondition 'running', which is useful context. Annotations already declare the action is not read-only and not idempotent. It doesn't disclose potential downtime, errors, or behavior if the VPS is not running, but the added precondition is a modest improvement.

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, direct sentence with no redundancy. Every word contributes, making it highly concise.

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 mutating action with no output schema, the description lacks essential context: it doesn't mention the expected response, possible errors (e.g., VPS not running), or any side effects like downtime. More detail would help the agent anticipate outcomes.

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 compensate by explaining the vps_id parameter, but it does not. The parameter name is self-explanatory, yet no additional meaning or format details are provided.

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 clear action ('restart') and resource ('VPS'), with a precondition ('running'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like start_vps or stop_vps, relying on the tool name itself for 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?

The phrase 'running' implies it should be used only when the VPS is running, providing a usage condition. But it offers no explicit guidance on when to use this over alternatives (e.g., stop then start) or when not to use it.

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