Compose: restart services

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden. It only states the basic restart behavior but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., container recreation, downtime, or impact on running processes). More transparency is needed for a potentially destructive operation.

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 (13 words) with no wasted information. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and optional targeting of services.

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?

Given the low complexity, the description is adequate but lacks completeness. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., file must exist), error scenarios, or return values. Since there is no output schema, some hint about what the tool returns would be helpful.

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, so each parameter is already documented. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides; for example, it does not explain the format of the 'services' list or expected values. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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'), the resource ('services in a stack'), and the ability to target specific services ('or only the ones you name'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like restart_container (single container) and compose_down/compose_up (full lifecycle).

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 implies the tool is for restarting compose services, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., restart_container for individual containers) or when not to use it. No exclusions or context are provided.

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