ncloud_reboot_mssql_server

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, which covers the safety profile. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context such as whether the reboot causes downtime, is asynchronous, or if there are any side effects. It does not contradict the annotations, but it also provides no extra transparency.

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 a single, concise sentence of 8 words that immediately conveys the core operation. There is no wasted text, and it is appropriately sized for a simple reboot action.

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 simple one-parameter reboot tool, the description is minimally adequate. The schema covers the parameter, and annotations cover safety. However, the description lacks any context about operational impact (e.g., downtime, async behavior) or when to use the tool, which would help an agent invoke it correctly. It is not incomplete enough to be unusable, but it barely meets the minimum viable threshold.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage for the single parameter (cloudMssqlServerInstanceNo) with a clear description. The description's mention of 'server instance' only loosely ties to the parameter without adding any new format, constraints, or deeper meaning. Baseline 3 applies since the schema does all necessary work.

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 ('Reboot') and the resource ('Cloud DB for MSSQL server instance'), which distinguishes it from other reboot tools for MySQL, PostgreSQL, etc. The wording is slightly awkward ('a Cloud DB for MSSQL server instance') but the meaning is unambiguous. It loses a point because it doesn't explicitly mention the instance number parameter, though that is covered by the schema.

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 (e.g., ncloud_reboot_mysql_server, ncloud_reboot_postgresql_server) or any prerequisites like instance state. The description simply restates the action without any usage context or exclusions.

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