chatgpt_new_chat

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It states the action but does not mention side effects on the current conversation, authentication requirements, or whether it resets state irreversibly. The wording 'clean/new' hints at a fresh start, but without annotations, details like rate limits or blocking behavior are missing.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the key information: what it does ('start') and what entity ('a clean/new conversation'). Every word earns its place.

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?

For a zero-parameter, no-output tool, the description is complete enough to understand its function. It could briefly mention any effect on the existing conversation, but given the simplicity, the provided text is adequate.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema coverage is 100% vacuously. According to the rubric, a baseline of 4 applies here, and the description adds no parameter information, which is appropriate and sufficient.

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 'Start' with the object 'clean/new conversation' and notes the platform 'ChatGPT Web', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like chatgpt_ask. It is precise and immediately understandable.

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 for beginning a fresh conversation but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like chatgpt_ask or chatgpt_get_latest_response. It also lacks any mention of preconditions or typical scenarios, placing it at the 'implied usage' level.

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