agy_reset

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only says 'Reset the active conversation', which implies clearing state, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether it deletes history, is irreversible, requires active connection) or explain the clear_all_sessions parameter's effect. This is minimal and inadequate for a mutation tool.

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, front-loaded sentence with the alias note, which is concise. However, it is under-specified rather than efficiently concise – it omits essential details about behavior and parameters, so it is not appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 tool has one optional parameter and no output schema, but the description fails to explain the parameter's semantics, return value, or any prerequisites. For a reset operation, it should at least mention that it clears conversation context and what clear_all_sessions does. The description is incomplete for safe and correct usage.

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 one parameter clear_all_sessions with zero description coverage. The description does not mention or explain this parameter at all. An agent cannot infer what 'clear all sessions' means from the description, leaving a critical 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 states a specific verb ('Reset'), a specific resource ('active conversation with Google Antigravity'), and clarifies it is a legacy alias to delegate_reset. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like agy_ask or agy_chat, which are about interaction rather than resetting.

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 implies this is a legacy alias for delegate_reset, hinting that the modern alternative is delegate_reset, but it does not explicitly state when to use this vs. delegate_reset or other siblings. It provides no explicit exclusions or conditions, leaving the choice somewhat inferred.

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