lua_extension_reload

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

With all annotations set to false, the description carries full burden but only states 'Reload' without disclosing side effects, permission requirements, or what changes occur. The term 'reload' implies potential disruptive behavior (e.g., resetting state) but is not clarified.

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 a single sentence, which is concise, but it is too minimal to be effective. It earns its place by stating the purpose but omits essential details.

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?

Despite low complexity (1 optional parameter with default), the description is incomplete. It lacks context about what reloading entails, the meaning of 'strict allowlist', and the output (though an output schema exists).

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 0%, and the tool description does not mention the 'name' parameter at all. No explanation of how to specify which extension to reload, nor the purpose of the default value.

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 explicitly states the action ('Reload') and the resource ('extension from the Lua bridge's own strict allowlist'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like lua_bridge_status, as no other tool performs reloading.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool, no mention of prerequisites, nor any differentiation from alternatives. Usage can only be inferred from the name.

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