ako_restart

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

The description explains the restart mechanism (deletion + StatefulSet recreation), mentions traffic disruption, and details the safety confirmation process (confirmed=True required). This goes beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true) by providing concrete behavioral and safety context.

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 well-structured, starting with a clear action tag, then purpose, usage hint, safety note, and parameter explanation. Every sentence adds value, and the format is easy to parse.

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 simplicity and the existence of an output schema, the description covers all relevant aspects: purpose, trigger conditions, side effects, safety mechanisms, and parameter details. Nothing essential is missing.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining both parameters: 'context' as optional K8s context name, and 'confirmed' as a boolean that must be True to execute, with default False producing a preview. This adds essential meaning absent from the schema.

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 restarts the AKO pod by deleting it, with automatic recreation via StatefulSet. It explicitly mentions when to use (stuck or after config changes), distinguishing it from sibling tools that are mostly for status, logs, or configuration.

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 specifies when to use ('Use when AKO is stuck or after config changes') and warns of brief traffic disruption. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or give when-not-to-use guidance, but the usage context is clear and sufficient for decision-making.

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