reset_device_emulation

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly lists what gets restored: viewport size, user agent, device pixel ratio, and touch settings. This gives a clear understanding of the tool's effects, though it does not mention potential side effects on other properties.

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 front-loads the main action ('Remove all device emulation overrides') and concisely lists the restored settings. Every word is necessary and contributes to clarity without waste.

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 (zero parameters, no output schema), the description is fully complete. It explains exactly what the tool does and what is restored, leaving no meaningful gaps for an AI agent to infer.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no additional parameter information, but none is needed. It adequately describes the tool's operation without requiring parameters.

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's purpose: to remove all device emulation overrides and restore original settings. It uses a specific verb ('remove'/'restore') and identifies the resource ('device emulation overrides'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'set_device_emulation'.

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 the tool should be used after device emulation has been applied, but it does not explicitly state when to use it or provide alternatives. No guidance on when not to use it or prerequisites, leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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