Undo a reset of a show's watched progress by providing its Trakt ID or slug, restoring previously cleared progress.
Undo reset show progress.
DELETE /shows/{id}/progress/watched/reset
Args: id: The id/slug of the resource.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare destructiveHint and idempotentHint. The description adds the action of undoing a reset but does not disclose side effects, requirements, or the impact on watched progress. It provides minimal added value beyond the annotations.
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 extremely concise, with the purpose stated first, followed by the endpoint and parameter. Every sentence adds value and there is no redundant information.
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 the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description is mostly adequate but lacks details on the consequences of undoing the reset, such as whether it restores original watched progress or has other effects. The annotation coverage compensates for some gaps, but the description could be more explicit.
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 schema only defines 'id' as a string with no description. The description clarifies that it accepts an id/slug, which is additional meaning beyond the schema and helps the agent understand the parameter format.
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 states a clear verb 'Undo' and a specific resource 'reset show progress', distinguishing it from the sibling create_shows_by_id_progress_watched_reset which likely performs the reset. The inclusion of the HTTP path adds further specificity.
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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as the create version, or any prerequisites. The description simply gives the endpoint and the argument without contextual direction.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.