reset_site_permissions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It states that the action restores temporary leases, affects the selected browser, and only accepts http/https origins. It could disclose side effects or irreversibility in more detail, but the core behavior is transparent.

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?

Two sentences deliver the essential behavior, the conditional reset-all usage, and the origin scheme constraint. The description is compact, front-loaded, and every clause 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?

The description covers the main behavior and the crucial origin constraint, but it leaves session_id semantics and accepted permission values unspecified. The output schema helps with return expectations, yet the missing parameter context prevents full standalone completeness.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains origin and permission usage, including the reset-all behavior when both are omitted, but it does not describe session_id at all or enumerate valid permission values. This is a meaningful gap.

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 a specific verb ('Restore') and resource ('temporary site-permission leases'), making the tool's function immediately clear. It also distinguishes this tool from siblings like set_site_permission by framing it as the reset counterpart.

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 gives concrete usage guidance: omit origin and permission to reset every lease for the selected browser, and restrict origin to http/https. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context makes the all-vs-matching distinction clear.

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