electron_reset

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 effectively describes the tool's behavior: it resets a connection and clears a state object, which implies a destructive action that could affect ongoing operations. However, it doesn't detail potential side effects like session loss or reconnection time.

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 extremely concise with three short sentences that each add value: stating the action, when to use it, and what it affects. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and wastes no words.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (a reset operation with no parameters) and the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, usage context, and behavioral effect, though it could benefit from mentioning what 'CDP' stands for or the expected outcome after reset.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters, maintaining focus on the tool's purpose and usage. A baseline of 4 is applied since no parameters exist.

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 specific action ('Reset CDP connection') and the resource affected ('state object'), distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'electron_execute' which likely performs execution rather than resetting connections. It goes beyond just restating the name 'electron_reset' by explaining what gets reset.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('when execute times out or returns connectivity errors'), providing clear context for its application. It implies an alternative by referencing the sibling tool 'electron_execute' for normal operations, though it doesn't explicitly name it as an alternative.

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