niri_reload_config

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the action without disclosing potential side effects, such as whether the reload triggers a full application of changes, could fail on invalid config, or affects the running session. This lack of detail is a significant gap for a configuration-changing tool.

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 a single, focused sentence: 'Reload Niri DE configuration file (`config.kdl`).' It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words, making it maximally concise.

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 tool is simple with no parameters, and an output schema exists, so return value details are not required. The description sufficiently conveys the action and target resource. However, it could add a brief note about when reloading is needed (e.g., after editing the config) but is otherwise complete for a zero-param config reload tool.

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, which earns a baseline of 4. The description adds no parameter details because there are none to describe, and the schema already covers the empty input object.

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 tool's action with a specific verb ('Reload') and resource ('Niri DE configuration file (`config.kdl`)'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools, which focus on querying or manipulating windows/workspaces, by uniquely targeting configuration reload.

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 implies usage: reloading the config after editing it. However, it provides no explicit when-to-use guidance, no excluded scenarios, and does not mention alternatives (though no direct alternative exists among siblings). This meets the 'implied usage' threshold, but lacks explicit context.

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