session_restart

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Restart') but doesn't explain what restarting entails (e.g., does it reload configurations, kill processes, or reset state?), potential side effects, permissions required, or error conditions. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded, with the core purpose stated in the first sentence and parameter details in a brief 'Args' section. Every sentence earns its place, and there's no unnecessary information or repetition.

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 tool has one parameter with low schema coverage (0%) and an output schema exists (which reduces the need to describe return values), the description is moderately complete. It covers the parameter's optional behavior but lacks details on the restart action's effects, making it adequate but with clear gaps for a mutation tool.

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 description adds meaningful semantics for the single parameter 'session_id' by explaining that omitting it targets the active session, which isn't covered in the input schema (0% schema description coverage). This compensates well for the schema's lack of detail, though it doesn't elaborate on format or validation rules.

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') and resource ('an iTerm2 session'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this tool from sibling tools like 'session_clear' or 'session_close', which also operate on sessions but perform different 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 provides implied usage guidance by mentioning that omitting 'session_id' targets the active session, which helps understand when to use this parameter. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'session_clear' (which clears output) or 'session_close' (which terminates), leaving some ambiguity.

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