reload_hda

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

The description discloses disk and registry side effects and explicitly warns that the operation cannot be undone via Houdini's undo system. This is meaningful behavioral context, especially with no annotations provided. It could add preconditions or error behavior, but the core safety warning is clearly communicated.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and contains zero filler. The NO_UNDO repetition is acceptable and reinforces the warning without bloating the text.

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?

The description covers the core purpose and side effects, but it lacks parameter clarification and usage timing. For a single-parameter tool with no output schema, the agent is left guessing what file_path should be. The description is adequate for a basic understanding but not fully complete.

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 coverage is 0% and the description entirely ignores file_path. There is no indication whether the parameter expects a .hda file path, a directory, or a library name. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema's bare 'File Path' title.

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 verb+resource: '重载 HDA 库' (reload HDA library). It distinguishes the action from siblings by the explicit 'reload' and mentions the underlying tool name, though it does not directly contrast with update_hda or hda_install.

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 explicit when-to-use or alternative exclusions are provided. The NO_UNDO warning implies caution but does not state 'use this after editing HDA files on disk' or avoid during active sessions. There is no mention of sibling tools or scenarios.

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