mujoco_reset

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

Beyond the idempotentHint annotation, the description adds meaningful behavior: it zeros the step counter, clears force guard/runtime errors, restores the seeded start when present, and promises deterministic trajectory reproduction. It also states the return contract (same shape as mujoco_get_state). No contradiction with readOnlyHint=false or destructiveHint=false.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core action, and every sentence contributes behavior or return information. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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 reset operation with an output schema and clear annotations, the description covers side effects, determinism, keyframe behavior, and return shape. The main gap is the lack of explicit guidance on when reset should be preferred over snapshot restore or set_state, but this is not essential to invoking it correctly.

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 67%, and the description adds value by specifying what happens without a keyframe (configured seeded start vs model defaults) and clarifying keyframe selection. Precision and session_id are already adequately documented in the schema, so the description need not repeat them.

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 opening sentence names a specific action and resource ('Reset a session to its initial state (or a named keyframe) and zero the step counter'). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like mujoco_set_state or mujoco_restore_snapshot, which restore arbitrary or previously captured states rather than the session's initial/keyframe state.

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 explains the behavior for keyframe vs no-keyframe calls, which implies when reset is useful, but it never explicitly says when to choose reset over restore_snapshot, set_state, or configure_experiment. No alternatives or exclusions are named, so the guidance is implied rather than stated.

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