deployado_restart_service

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety envelope is known. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not warn of service interruption, explain what happens to in-flight requests, or clarify the non-idempotent behavior the annotation flags.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and free of filler, but it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise: for a mutating operation with no output schema, one sentence leaves the agent without operational context that could have been added in a few words.

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 service-restart mutation with no output schema, the description should convey at minimum the effect on the running service and how to confirm success (e.g., check logs or service status). None of that is present, so the definition is thin for a state-changing tool despite complete parameter coverage.

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 coverage is 100% with a single required service_id documented as a UUID in the schema itself. The description contributes no additional meaning (e.g., accepted formats, whether the service must be in a particular state), so baseline 3 applies.

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 specific verb and resource ('Restart a service'), which is unambiguous and clearly a mutation rather than a read. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the sibling operations start_service and stop_service, leaving the boundary between those three implicit in the verb alone.

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 on when to restart versus stop/start a service or redeploy, and no mention of prerequisites such as a healthy deployment or expected downtime. The agent must infer the usage scenario entirely from the verb.

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