reset_recipe_trigger

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full disclosure burden. It reveals the side effect of duplicate records and specifies the trigger type limitation, going beyond a generic 'reset' statement. It does not cover auth or rate limits, but the core behavior is transparent.

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?

Three sentences cover the task, usage, constraints, and side-effect warning. It is concise without sacrificing essential information, though the lack of parameter detail keeps it from being perfectly efficient.

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?

For a single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what it does, when to use it, its limitations, and a critical side effect. It lacks explicit info about the id parameter and the response format, but these are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity.

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 schema has 0% description coverage and the tool description does not mention the 'id' parameter or what it represents. An agent must infer that 'id' refers to a recipe ID, but this is not explicitly stated in either the schema or description, creating a gap for correct invocation.

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 action ('Reset a recipe trigger cursor'), the resource ('recipe trigger'), and the endpoint. It also explains the purpose ('re-sync data from the source'), which distinguishes this from other recipe operations like starting or stopping triggers.

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?

It explicitly states when to use it ('to re-sync data from the source') and includes critical constraints ('Only works with polling and scheduled triggers'). It doesn't name specific alternative tools, but the condition of usage is clear enough to avoid misuse.

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