reset_session

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool 'clear[s] all session state', implying a destructive mutation, but doesn't detail what 'session state' includes (e.g., cached data, user context) or any side effects like resetting authentication or rate limits. It adds some context but lacks depth on behavioral traits.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by a bulleted list for usage guidelines. Every sentence earns its place by adding value without redundancy, making it efficient and well-structured for quick understanding.

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 low complexity (0 parameters, no output schema) and lack of annotations, the description is mostly complete: it states the purpose, provides usage guidelines, and implies behavior. However, it could enhance completeness by specifying what 'session state' entails or confirming no output, but it's adequate for this simple tool.

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?

There are 0 parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description doesn't mention parameters, which is appropriate. Baseline for 0 params is 4, as it avoids unnecessary details while being complete for a parameterless tool.

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 purpose with the verb 'clear' and resource 'session state', plus the outcome 'for fresh start'. It distinguishes from siblings like get_session_state (which reads state) by focusing on resetting. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with all siblings (e.g., repeat_last might also involve session handling), keeping it from a perfect 5.

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 includes a 'USE WHEN' section with three explicit scenarios: switching files, re-exploring from scratch, and handling corrupted state. This provides clear guidance on when to invoke this tool versus alternatives, such as using get_session_state to check state first or other tools for specific file operations.

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