reset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It does disclose the key side effect (the session is discarded) and the post-condition (new identity on next navigation), but says nothing about what exactly is lost (cookies, storage, challenge state) or whether the reset affects in-flight state used by solve_challenge/challenge_state.

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 sentence with the action front-loaded and the consequence in a compact parenthetical. Every clause adds information; nothing is redundant.

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 zero-parameter reset with an output schema covering return values, the definition gives enough to call it correctly. The one gap is the interaction with sibling state tools (challenge_state, solve_challenge), which an agent might reasonably wonder about.

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 the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. It does not need to explain any inputs.

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 ('discard') and a specific resource ('the current browsing session'), plus the resulting state ('a fresh, coherent identity is used for the next navigation'). That is clear enough to separate it from open/click/fill, though it never names a sibling to contrast against.

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 parenthetical implies the reason to call it (you want a clean identity before the next navigation), but there is no explicit when-to-use / when-not-to-use statement or reference to alternatives such as opening a new page or clearing challenge state. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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