liara_restart_database

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Restart a database' implies a potentially disruptive operation that may cause downtime, but the description doesn't mention this, nor does it address permissions needed, whether the restart is immediate or scheduled, or what happens to active connections. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 - just three words that directly convey the tool's purpose. There's zero wasted language, and the information is front-loaded with the essential action and resource.

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 database restart operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what 'restart' entails (graceful shutdown? forced restart?), potential impacts (downtime, data loss risk), success indicators, or error conditions. The agent lacks critical context to use this tool safely and effectively.

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 (the 'name' parameter is fully documented in the schema), so the baseline is 3. The description doesn't add any parameter information beyond what's in the schema, but doesn't need to since the schema already covers the single required parameter adequately.

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 ('Restart') and resource ('a database'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like liara_start_database or liara_stop_database, but the verb 'restart' is specific enough to imply a different operation from start/stop.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like liara_start_database, liara_stop_database, or liara_update_database. There's no mention of prerequisites, consequences, or appropriate contexts for restarting versus other database operations.

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