liara_restart_app

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action without behavioral details. It doesn't disclose potential downtime, permissions required, side effects (e.g., temporary unavailability), or response behavior. For a mutation tool like restart, this lack of transparency is a significant gap.

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 extremely concise at three words, with zero wasted text. It's front-loaded and to the point, making it easy to parse quickly. This is an example of efficient communication.

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 this is a mutation tool (restart) with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like downtime, idempotency, error conditions, or what happens post-restart. For a tool that could disrupt service, more context is needed.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage (parameter 'name' is fully described), so the baseline score is 3. The tool description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides, but it doesn't need to compensate for gaps.

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 'Restart an app' clearly states the action (restart) and target resource (app), which is adequate. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like liara_start_app or liara_stop_app, nor does it specify what 'restart' entails (e.g., graceful vs. forced). It's a basic but functional statement of purpose.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like liara_start_app or liara_stop_app, or prerequisites (e.g., app must be running). The description alone offers no context for decision-making, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and sibling list.

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