reset_rate_limit

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It successfully warns about the 'ALL clients' scope when client_id is omitted and describes the return value format. However, it omits details about reversibility, authorization requirements, or whether this affects active connections versus just counters.

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?

Uses a clear structured format (description, CAUTION, Args, Returns) with no wasted words. The warning is front-loaded after the purpose statement, and the parameter documentation is concise yet complete for a single-parameter tool.

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?

Appropriately complete for a low-complexity tool (1 parameter, no nesting) with an output schema present. It covers purpose, parameter behavior, and return value. Could be improved by mentioning permission requirements or irreversibility given the destructive nature, but sufficient for 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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the Args section clearly documents the client_id parameter as 'Optional' and explains the critical behavioral implication: 'If not provided, resets ALL clients.' This compensates effectively for the sparse schema.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Reset') and resource ('rate limit state') plus clear scope ('for a client or all clients'). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like 'get_rate_limit_stats' (read-only inspection) and 'set_rate_limit_config' (configuration changes).

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 'CAUTION: This is an administrative tool. Use with care' provides important context about the privileged nature of the operation, but lacks explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison to alternatives like adjusting rate limit configs rather than resetting state.

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