Reset pin code

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the write/destructive nature is covered. The description adds that the account password is required as an authorization step, which is useful, but does not explain what happens to existing pins or any auth-failure behavior.

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?

Short and front-loaded with the action, then the mechanism. Minor redundancy in repeating 'Reset pin code' from the title, and the appended operation/tag line is boilerplate rather than agent-facing content.

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 simple two-parameter auth mutation with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description is adequate: it names the target scope, the required credential, and the underlying DELETE endpoint. Only the lack of any prerequisite or failure-mode detail keeps it from a 5.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the two parameters are documented in the schema. The description only adds context for the password parameter ('account password') and says nothing about the pinCode parameter's role, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource ('Reset the pin code') and scopes it to the current user, with the mechanism (providing the account password). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the nearby siblings immich_change_pin_code and immich_setup_pin_code, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied by 'for the current user'. There is no guidance on when to prefer this over immich_change_pin_code or immich_setup_pin_code, which are the obvious alternatives in the sibling set.

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