reset_all_settings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. For a bulk mutation that overwrites every setting, it fails to disclose that user customizations are discarded, whether the action is reversible, whether it requires elevated permissions, or whether any scope (global vs per-workspace) applies.

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 short sentence with the verb and scope front-loaded and no wasted words – appropriately sized for a parameterless operation.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, for a destructive, no-annotation bulk operation, the description omits the impact and reversibility information an agent needs to call it safely.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing to document; the baseline for a parameterless tool is 4. The description correctly implies no inputs are needed.

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 specific verb ('Reset') and resource ('all settings') with the scope explicitly quantified as 'all,' which implies a bulk operation. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the very close sibling reset_setting (singular) or set_setting/get_modified_settings, so an agent must infer the all-vs-one distinction.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus reset_setting (which resets a single setting) or get_modified_settings. No mention of prerequisites, confirmation needs, or the conditions under which a bulk reset is appropriate.

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