Reload app

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

Annotations indicate idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=false. The description adds behavioral context by explaining the tool triggers a reload like pressing 'r', and notes the Metro dependency. This adds value beyond the annotations without contradiction.

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 long, front-loads the primary action, and provides a concrete analogy. Every sentence adds value without redundancy or fluff.

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 (one optional parameter, output schema present), the description fully covers what the tool does, its main precondition, and its effect. No additional details are needed for correct invocation.

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 single parameter (targetId) is already described in the schema as 'Runtime target id (from list_runtime_targets)'. The description does not add new meaning or usage details beyond the schema, hence a baseline score of 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 the action ('Trigger a full JS reload'), the resource ('the running React Native app'), and an analogy ('same as pressing r in the Metro terminal'), making it specific and distinct from sibling tools like cancel_build or doctor.

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 a precondition ('Requires Metro running'), which guides the user on when the tool can be used. However, it does not provide explicit when-not or alternative tools for similar tasks, so it's clear but not comprehensive.

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