resolve_reset_intellisearch

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does communicate the most important trait — that this is a broad, potentially destructive operation affecting the ENTIRE project, not a scoped or reversible-looking action. However, it doesn't disclose side effects (e.g., invalidation of derived results), recoverability, or whether analysis must be regenerated afterward.

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?

A single 10-word sentence that front-loads the verb and action, emphasizes scope with 'ENTIRE', and clarifies the domain in a parenthetical. Every word earns its place with zero filler.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description conveys what the operation does, its scope, and its domain — sufficient for an agent to invoke it. Minor gaps remain around post-conditions and consequences, but the low complexity keeps the burden modest.

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, so there is nothing for the description to illuminate beyond the schema. The 0-params baseline of 4 applies; no semantic gap exists.

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 ('Clear'), a precise resource ('IntelliSearch analysis'), and a clear scope qualifier ('ENTIRE current project'). It reads as the inverse of the sibling 'resolve_analyze_intellisearch' and is distinct from similar tools like 'resolve_clear_transcription' and 'resolve_clear_audio_classification', which target different data.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't state that this precedes a re-run of resolve_analyze_intellisearch, when to choose it over scope-limited clear operations, or any conditions under which it should not be invoked. The parenthetical '(Resolve API scope)' is a domain qualifier, not usage guidance.

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