Clear app state

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It transparently states the destructive nature on Android ('full data wipe') and the limited scope on iOS ('resets permissions'), and even notes that a full data wipe on iOS requires reinstall. This is thorough and honest behavioral disclosure.

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: a single sentence plus a platform breakdown. It front-loads the core purpose ('Reset app state') and adds only necessary platform-specific details. Every word earns its place with no repetition or fluff.

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 description adequately covers the key contextual aspect—platform-specific behavior and destructive consequences. It does not mention return values or prerequisites, but with no output schema and only two parameters, the description is reasonably complete for a reset operation. A minor omission is lack of guidance on side effects like whether user data is recoverable, but overall it is sufficient.

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 only 50%: device_id has a helpful description, but app_id has none. The description adds no parameter semantics at all, leaving the agent to guess the format or purpose of app_id beyond its name. Despite device_id being well-described, the lack of effort to explain app_id or tie it to the action is a clear gap.

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 resets app state, with specific verbs and resources: 'Reset app state' and platform-specific actions (full data wipe on Android, permissions reset on iOS). This distinguishes it from siblings like stop_app or launch_app, which have different purposes.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (when resetting app state is needed) and explains platform-specific behavior. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as 'use stop_app to just stop the app,' so it misses the higher bar for sibling differentiation.

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