syncthing_restart_required

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true. The description adds nothing beyond that safety profile: it does not say what is checked, what conditions trigger 'required', or what the caller learns. No contradiction, but zero added behavioral context.

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?

It is short, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness — a two-word fragment for a tool with an undocumented two-parameter schema. There is nothing meaningful to front-load because nothing is said.

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?

With no output schema, no parameter documentation, and annotations covering only the safety profile, the description needs to carry the burden of explaining what the tool reports and how to scope it. It supplies none of that, leaving the definition effectively unusable on its own.

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?

Two parameters ('fields' and 'instance') have 0% schema description coverage and the description does not mention them at all. The description therefore does not compensate for the coverage gap in the slightest.

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 required.' is a fragment that merely restates the tool name rather than stating a verb and resource. It is genuinely ambiguous whether the tool checks whether a restart is required (a read) or performs a restart. Given the readOnlyHint annotation, the read interpretation is likely, but the description never says so.

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 when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives among the many syncthing_* siblings. An agent gets no help deciding between this and, for example, syncthing_system_status or syncthing_overview.

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