Reset Compute Session

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint and idempotentHint, and the description adds concrete detail on what is destroyed (cached session, SAS state) and what happens after (next compute call creates a fresh session transparently). This goes beyond the annotations and clarifies the non-obvious session-reuse 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?

Three concise sentences: the one-line action, the rationale, and the consequence. Every sentence contributes, and the core action is 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?

For a simple tool with one optional parameter, full schema coverage, and an output schema, the description explains the session lifecycle, why reset may be needed, and what happens afterward. Nothing critical for calling it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100%; the schema already fully describes compute_context_name, including its default behavior. The description adds no parameter-specific info, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 action ('Reset (delete)') on a specific resource ('cached compute session for a compute context'). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explaining it discards state rather than executing code or listing artifacts.

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?

Describes when to call it: when you want to discard persisted SAS state (WORK tables, macro variables, librefs) that otherwise carries across execute_sas_code and list_compute_* calls. It doesn't name alternatives (there are none for resetting), but the context is clear enough; a 5 would require an explicit exclusions sentence.

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