wick_reset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the core action ('Reset the session counter') and one behavioral trigger (rate limit reset), but does not disclose side effects, reversibility, or what exactly 'reset' entails beyond the name. This is minimal but not misleading.

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, front-loaded with the purpose, and contains no redundant wording. Every sentence earns its place: the first states the action, the second gives usage guidance.

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 tool with zero parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description adequately covers the essential aspects: what it does and when to use it. It could be slightly richer (e.g., clarifying that it resets to zero or any side effects), but it is sufficient for a simple reset operation.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so per the baseline rule for 0 params, a score of 4 is appropriate. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics since there are none.

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: 'Reset the session counter.' It is a specific verb+resource pairing. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like wick_track or wick_status, though the reset action is distinct.

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 gives explicit usage context: 'Use when starting a new task or after a rate limit reset.' This provides clear guidance on when to invoke the tool, but it does not mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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