Refresh a config to defaults (gated)

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It states that a backup is created (implying the operation is destructive but reversible) and that 'enableDangerous' is required. However, it doesn't explicitly state that existing settings will be overwritten or that the backup is the only restore path, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

All three sentences are short and purposeful: the first states the core action, the second adds a safety note about backups, and the third states a prerequisite. It is front-loaded and efficient with no unnecessary detail.

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 description covers the action, the backup side-effect, and the permission gate, which is adequate for a simple tool with a single enum parameter and no output schema. However, it doesn't mention return values, post-conditions, or explicitly note that the reset is destructive (beyond implying it via the backup). Given the simplicity, this is decent but not thorough.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description should explain the 'target' parameter. It merely says 'one known Omarchy configuration target' without listing or explaining the allowed enum values (e.g., 'chromium', 'hyprland'). The agent knows there's an enum from the schema but not what each value refers to, so the description adds minimal semantic 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 clearly states the action ('Reset') and the resource ('configuration target'), and notes it applies to a 'known' set, hinting at the enum. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'omarchy_default_set', which could also deal with defaults, so it's clear but not fully distinguishing.

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 mentions a prerequisite ('Requires enableDangerous') but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'omarchy_default_set' or 'omarchy_defaults'. It doesn't state conditions or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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