reset_or_restart_sessions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly warns that both actions terminate the session, notes that reset may cause data loss, and that restart is graceful but still ends the session. It also emphasizes user confirmation. This is strong disclosure for a destructive operation, though it could mention reversibility or recovery after the action.

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 extremely concise and effectively front-loaded: it opens with the core action, then provides a bolded CAUTION with the most critical behavioral details, and ends with an actionable instruction to confirm with the user. Every sentence is informative and there is no 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?

The description is fairly complete for a two-parameter tool with a clear enum. It covers the core purpose, the critical safety implications, and the need for user confirmation. However, it does not describe the output schema, pagination, or asynchronous behavior, but the presence of an output schema shifts some burden. Given the high-risk nature, a brief note on expected response could improve completeness.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters in detail. The description adds a caution about data loss but does not materially add semantic meaning beyond the schema's own descriptions, which already explain the difference between reset and restart and what session_ids is. Thus the description adds little value to parameter understanding.

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 ('Reset or restart the virtual machine backing one or more sessions') with a specific verb and resource, and explicitly distinguishes between the two actions (reset vs restart). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like disconnect_sessions or logoff_sessions, which are also session-affecting actions.

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 provides clear usage context: both actions terminate the user's session, reset is a hard power-cycle, restart is a graceful reboot. It also includes an explicit caution to confirm with the user before calling, which is a strong usage guideline. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like disconnect or logoff.

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