reset_session

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true; the description adds context by disclosing the optional file dump and the effect on the next `ask`. It does not contradict the annotations, and the remaining details (file destination, irreversibility without save) are left to the schema/defaults.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action and outcome with no filler. Every phrase 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?

The definition is largely complete for a low-complexity, fully optional-parameter tool: annotations cover safety, schema covers all parameters, and the description covers purpose and effect. It loses a point because the description itself scopes to 'Fable' and `ask` while the model parameter shows it also handles opus5/`ask_opus5`, and no return value/file-path behavior is mentioned in the absence of an output schema.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents save, model, and session. The tool description only repeats 'optionally to a file' and 'on that key' without adding new parameter-level meaning; baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb+resource: 'Dump ... and clear a Fable conversation session', and explains the outcome ('the next `ask` on that key starts a fresh topic'). This clearly distinguishes reset_session from the ask_* and session_* siblings.

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 conveys when to use the tool: when you want to start a fresh topic for a given session key. The schema's model parameter description adds guidance for choosing between `ask` and `ask_opus5` namespaces, but the tool description itself does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives.

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