reset_recipe

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the core destructive action but does not mention irreversibility, side effects on the recipe, permission requirements, or what happens to the current state. For a reset operation, this lack of detail is a significant gap.

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 clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and immediately conveys the primary purpose and effect.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and only one required parameter, the description covers the basic action but omits crucial context such as irreversibility, relationship to the recipe, typical use cases, and side effects. An AI agent would lack important information for confident invocation.

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 schema has one parameter (image_id) with 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain the parameter's role or format. Since the description fails to compensate for the low schema coverage, it provides no value beyond the raw property name.

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 action with a specific verb ('Remove all edits') and resource ('image'), and specifies the result ('restoring the image to its unedited state'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_recipe or set_recipe, which modify the recipe rather than reset the image.

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 when to use the tool (when you want to discard all edits and revert to the original), but it does not explicitly mention usage context or alternatives. There is no guidance on when not to use it or how it compares to related tools such as set_recipe or auto_adjust.

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