Reset session

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is largely covered. The description still adds real value beyond the hints by naming the exact data destroyed (session counters, latest events) and stating irreversibility ('Cannot be undone'), which idempotent/destructive hints do not express. No auth or rate-limit detail, but that is a minor gap relative to what is provided.

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?

Two tight sentences with zero filler, and the destructive consequence and irreversibility are front-loaded rather than buried. Every clause earns its place.

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 one-parameter destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers what is wiped and that it is permanent, and annotations cover the safety profile. Only the absence of auth/permission expectations keeps it short of complete.

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% and the single 'channel' parameter is fully documented there, including the 24-char hex format and the SE_CHANNEL_ID default. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('the channel's session data'), then parenthetically enumerates exactly what is cleared: session counters and latest events. This distinguishes it from siblings like sessions_get, sessions_update, and sessions_top without opening any schema.

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 explicit guidance on when to reset versus using sessions_update or sessions_update_settings, and no prerequisites noted. Usage is only implied by the destructive framing. The 'Cannot be undone.' line flags caution but does not route the agent among alternatives.

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