seerr_reset_password

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds a clear 'WRITE' warning and states it modifies the Seerr instance, which reinforces the mutating nature. It does not disclose side effects like session invalidation or authorization requirements, but with annotations present this is acceptable baseline.

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 concise single sentence with no filler. The WRITE warning is compact and immediately conveys the operation's mutating nature. 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?

This is a sensitive write operation, yet the description omits critical details: which user the guid refers to, the structure of the body for the new password, and any admin permission requirements. With zero parameter descriptions and no explanation of side effects, the description is incomplete for safe and correct 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?

Schema coverage is 0% and the description provides no explanation of the two parameters. 'guid' likely identifies the user, and 'body' likely contains the new password, but neither is documented. The body object is completely unspecified (additionalProperties=true), leaving the agent unable to construct a valid request from the description alone.

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 states 'Reset the password for a user' with a specific verb and resource, making the core purpose clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like seerr_request_password_reset or seerr_create_user_settings_password, but the name and wording indicate an admin-level reset action.

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 'WRITE: this modifies your Seerr instance' warning conveys that this is a mutating operation, implying caution. However, the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., requesting a password reset email) or any required permissions/context.

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