iaas_reset_machine

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

The annotations already declare non-readonly, non-idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the description's only added context is the cryptic line 'Second day reset operation for machine'. It never says what a reset actually does to the guest (hard reset vs graceful, data-loss risk, whether it waits for completion), which matters for a mutation tool with non-idempotent semantics and no output schema.

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?

Very short, but the two lines say essentially the same thing, and the raw 'POST /iaas/api/machines/{id}/operations/reset' duplicates what the annotation title already contains. Several words could be spent instead on the reset-vs-reboot distinction.

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 non-idempotent mutation tool in a dense family of machine power-operation siblings, with no output schema, the description omits state requirements, effect on the guest OS, and differentiation from neighbours. An agent could call it, but has no basis to know whether it should.

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 100%, so both the required machine id and the optional apiVersion are already documented in the schema. The description only restates the path template ending in {id}, adding no format, constraint, or versioning guidance beyond the schema text.

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?

States a verb (reset) and resource (machine), so the basic action is identifiable. But the sibling set contains iaas_reboot_machine, iaas_restart_machine, iaas_power_off_machine and iaas_shutdown_machine, and nothing here says how a reset differs from a reboot or restart, leaving the agent unable to pick correctly among near-identical operations.

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or prerequisite information is given. There is no mention of the obvious alternatives (reboot/restart/power cycle) or of any required machine state before a reset can be issued.

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