session_reset

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

The description openly discloses that loaded frames and variables are gone, which is a destructive effect. This directly contradicts the annotation destructiveHint=false, which indicates the tool is not destructive. Since the description contradicts structured metadata, it scores 1.

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 that explains what happens (session kernel emptied) and the consequence (next data_load starts fresh). Every clause contributes meaning, with no filler or redundancy.

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 no-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description fully explains the purpose and outcome. It could mention that external state is unaffected, but the openWorldHint=false annotation already covers that, and the core behavior is described completely.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema covers 100% of them, so there is no parameter documentation burden. With no parameters, the baseline is 4, and the description appropriately adds no irrelevant parameter details.

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 ('Empty') and a clear resource ('session kernel'), and explicitly states the effect ('loaded frames and variables are gone'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like session_state, which would inspect state, and data_load, which would populate it.

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 when to use the tool ('the next data_load starts fresh') but does not explicitly state conditions, exclusions, or alternatives. It does not compare itself to sibling tools like session_state or data_load, leaving the decision partly implicit.

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