restart_astrbot

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 tool triggers a restart and waits for AstrBot to become available again, which is useful behavioral context. However, it lacks details on permissions required, whether it's idempotent, potential downtime duration, or error handling (e.g., what happens if restart fails).

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 sentences that directly explain the action and post-action behavior. It's front-loaded with the core purpose. While efficient, it could be slightly more structured by explicitly separating purpose from behavioral notes.

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's complexity (a system restart operation with no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It explains what the tool does but lacks critical context like permissions, side effects, or error scenarios. The presence of an output schema helps, but the description doesn't leverage it to clarify return values or success criteria.

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 tool has 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters, focusing instead on the tool's effect. A baseline of 4 is applied as per rules for 0-param tools.

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 ('重启' meaning restart) and the target resource ('AstrBot Core'), making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on core restart rather than configuration, messaging, or logging operations. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with potential similar tools like 'apply_astrbot_config_ops' which might also affect system state.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing admin permissions), when it's appropriate (e.g., after config changes, during troubleshooting), or what side effects might occur (e.g., temporary service interruption). Without such context, an agent might misuse it.

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