ASTRA

snn_reset

DestructiveIdempotent

Resets the SNN Engine to clear simulation state and restore default parameters, enabling a clean start for new LIF+STDP runs or troubleshooting.

Instructions

Reset SNN Engine

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "snn_reset"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.1.0Sep 23, 2026

TDQS

C2.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile and repeat-call semantics are covered structurally. The description itself adds nothing: it does not say what state is wiped, whether the reset is recoverable, or whether it must be followed by re-initialization. No contradiction with annotations, but no added value either.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is short and front-loaded, but this is under-specification rather than concision: a two-word phrase is not an appropriately sized description for a destructive engine reset. No sentence beyond the title exists to earn its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema and a destructive, idempotent annotation profile, the description should at minimum state what the reset affects and any prerequisites or follow-up steps. None of that is present, leaving the agent unable to predict the tool's effect.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the schema carries no semantics the description needs to compensate for. The baseline of 4 applies; nothing is misdocumented, though nothing is enriched.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Reset SNN Engine" merely restates the tool name and the annotation title verbatim, adding no information beyond them. An agent learns that some SNN engine gets reset, but nothing about scope, mode, or what distinguishes it from siblings like tcai_reset or simulation_control.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to invoke this versus alternatives such as get_snn_state, snn_step, simulation_control, or the other reset-family tool tcai_reset. For a destructive reset with many adjacent lifecycle tools, the absence of any when/when-not routing is a serious gap.

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

Deploy Server