Reset all stored performance metrics to clear accumulated data and reinitialize tracking. Use this action when metrics are outdated or need a clean baseline for accurate memory measurement.
Reset all performance metrics.
Returns: Dict with: success, message.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.2.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations available, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Reset all' implies a mutating/destructive action, but the description does not state severity, irreversibility, or potential impact on other operations. It only promises a return dict.
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 brief and to the point, with the core action stated first. It could be improved by adding a sentence about when to reset, but it wastes no words.
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 tool with an output schema, the description is minimally sufficient to invoke it. However, it omits usage context, side effects, and any caution about resetting all metrics, which leaves the agent guessing about appropriate use.
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 has zero parameters, so deep parameter semantics are unnecessary. No param description is required, and the baseline of 4 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?
The description clearly identifies a specific verb ('Reset') and resource ('all performance metrics'), making the tool's purpose understandable. It is not a tautology and is distinct from the sibling tools, which focus on analysis, search, or memory operations.
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 guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as gc or analyze_for_recall. There are no prerequisites, conditions, or exclusion criteria.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.