rate_limit_limiter_reset

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It states the action (reset counters) but does not disclose behavioral traits like whether this is destructive, requires permissions, or any side effects.

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 very concise at one sentence, but it sacrifices necessary detail. It is front-loaded with the action but lacks supporting context.

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 that the tool has one required parameter and no parameter description in the schema or description, the description is incomplete. It references a limiter but does not explain how to identify it or what the output represents.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description does not mention the required parameter 'name' at all. It fails to add meaning beyond the schema, leaving the agent to infer what 'name' refers to.

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 uses a specific verb 'Reset' and identifies the resource 'a limiter's counters' to their initial state. It clearly conveys the core action, though it could better differentiate from sibling tools like rate_limit_limiter_create or rate_limit_limiter_consume.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as rate_limit_limiter_create or rate_limit_limiter_check. No prerequisites (e.g., limiter must exist) or context for appropriate usage are provided.

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