reload

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: destructive nature ('discarding all unsaved changes', 'clears dynamic DOM state'), side effects explicitly called out, and return value ('reload confirmation'). No contradictions.

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 four sentences, each earning its place: action + side effects, prerequisites, usage guidance, and alternatives. No extraneous text, well front-loaded.

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?

Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description covers all needed context: purpose, behavioral traits, prerequisites, usage instructions, alternatives. It is complete for this tool's complexity.

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?

There are no parameters (0 params), so the schema is fully covered. The description adds no parameter-specific info because none exist. Baseline 4 applies as per guidelines.

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 ('Reloads the current page'), the resource ('current page'), and the scope ('discarding all unsaved changes and re-fetching resources'). It explicitly names sibling tools 'navigate' and 'pause_on_load' as alternatives, distinguishing itself effectively.

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 specifies when to use the tool ('to refresh page content or reset to initial load state'), provides a prerequisite ('requires an active Chrome tab'), and lists alternatives with their purposes. This covers both when and when-not.

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