restart_server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the server exits with code 0, that the process manager starts a fresh process to load updated code/tools, and that the client must reconnect. It also mentions the environment variable to disable restart. This is comprehensive for a tool with no annotations.

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 concise with two short paragraphs. The first sentence immediately states the core purpose, and subsequent sentences add necessary detail without redundancy. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Despite having no parameters, the description fully covers the restart behavior, reconnection requirement, and configuration option. With an output schema present, the description is not required to explain return values, and it would add no extra utility here.

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 zero parameters, so baseline is 4 per rubric. The description does not discuss parameters because there are none, which is appropriate. No additional parameter information is needed.

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 tool's action: 'Request the server to exit so a process manager can restart it (SSE only).' This specifies a unique verb ('restart') and resource ('server'), and the SSE-only qualifier distinguishes it from sibling tools that perform other actions.

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 explains when to use the tool: with SSE and when a process manager is in place. It also notes that restart is allowed by default and can be disabled. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternative tools, but given the specific context, the guidance is clear enough.

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