reset_monitor

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

The description discloses the key destructive effect—'clearing all historical statistics and logs'—which is critical with no annotations present. However, it does not mention irreversibility, potential impact on current monitoring status, or any permissions needed. The main behavioral trait is stated, but other important details are omitted.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the action verb 'Reset' and immediately explains the consequence. Every word adds value, with no unnecessary filler 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's simplicity (one parameter, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema, the description is largely complete. It states the action and its effect, which is sufficient for basic invocation. However, it lacks usage differentiation and deeper consequence details, preventing a perfect score.

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 schema already fully documents the single parameter (monitor_id) with a clear description. The tool description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, so it provides no value beyond the schema, warranting the baseline score of 3.

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 the specific verb 'reset' on the resource 'monitor' and clarifies what reset means: 'clearing all historical statistics and logs.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like edit_monitor (changes settings) and delete_monitor (removes the monitor), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies usage context (when you need to clear a monitor's history) but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or scenarios to avoid. The context is sufficient for an agent to infer the main use case but lacks explicit direction.

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