services_leave_rescue_mode

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond the HTTP route: it does not say whether leaving rescue mode reboots the service, whether data is affected, or what permissions are required — meaningful gaps given destructiveHint=true.

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 definition is minimal and front-loaded: the action leads, with the endpoint path as the only supplementary detail. There is no filler, though the path line contributes little an agent cannot get from the operation itself.

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?

This is a destructive, non-idempotent mutation with an entirely undocumented parameter and no output schema. The description does not cover preconditions, side effects (reboot or downtime), or error conditions — the parts an agent most needs before invoking it.

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% for the single required parameter 'id'. The description only echoes '{id}' inside the path, leaving it implicit that this is the service identifier rather than, say, a rescue-session ID; no type, format, or validity constraints are added.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Leave rescue mode') and the endpoint path POST /services/{id}/rescue/leave reinforces that this is the inverse of services_enter_rescue_mode. The purpose is unambiguous, though the differentiation from the sibling is carried by naming alone rather than stated explicitly.

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 use this tool, what precondition must hold (e.g. the service is currently in rescue mode), or what happens if it is not. An agent must infer the pairing with services_enter_rescue_mode from the names.

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