reset_query_stats

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses irreversibility and a dry-run option, but does not mention authorization requirements, performance impact, or other side effects beyond the stated risk level.

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 and well-structured, starting with a risk tag, then a brief sentence, followed by parameter explanations. No redundant sentences; every part adds value.

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 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior and key parameter semantics, but it lacks information about the return value or side effects beyond irreversibility, and the target parameter remains ambiguous.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains dry_run as a preview mode and target as an optional config name, but 'target' is vague ('from config') and could leave agents confused about valid values.

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 resets pg_stat_statements accumulators, using specific verbs 'reset' and 'irreversible'. It distinguishes from sibling tools, which are mostly read or analysis tools, but it could be more explicit about what exactly is reset.

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 caution by highlighting irreversibility and suggesting dry_run=True for preview, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide conditions that warrant resetting.

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