reset_demo

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of indicating destructive behavior. The verb 'wipes' clearly conveys that data is erased, and 'resets the virtual clock' is explicit about the clock behavior. It could go further by stating irreversibility, but the language is sufficient for a destructive operation.

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 two sentences, front-loading the action and then providing usage context. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is complete. It covers what the tool does, what stores are affected, and when to use it. It also differentiates from sibling 'simulate_days_passing' by specifying it resets to today.

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 coverage is 100% (trivially). The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed since the tool takes no inputs. The baseline of 4 is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

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 a specific verb ('wipes', 'resets') and identifies the exact resources affected (commitment store, ticket store, virtual clock), making it distinct from siblings like 'simulate_days_passing' (which advances the clock) and 'upsert_commitment' (which modifies individual records).

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Use this to restart the demo scenario cleanly.' It does not explicitly exclude other tools, but the context is clear enough that an agent would know this is for resetting demo state rather than for ongoing operations.

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