reset

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys that the tool resets download state and causes re-download, but does not detail side effects like whether existing files are deleted, if downloads are immediately stopped, or if the operation is reversible. The main behavior is stated, but additional nuance is missing.

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 a single, focused sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, delivering the core function efficiently.

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 has 2 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description leaves critical ambiguities unaddressed, such as the default behavior when no parameters are provided, the relationship between link_ids and package_ids, and the exact effects of the reset operation. The description is too minimal to be considered complete for this tool.

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 two parameters (link_ids and package_ids) with no descriptions, and the tool description does not explain them. The parameter names hint at their purpose, but the description does not clarify how they interact, whether both can be used together, or what happens when they are null (e.g., does it reset all items?). Schema coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate but does not.

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 download-queue items, specifying the action (reset), the resource (download-queue items), and the intended outcome (re-download from scratch). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'remove' or 'force_start'.

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 explicitly indicates when to use the tool: when download-queue items need to be re-downloaded from scratch. It provides clear context but does not mention exclusions or alternatives, which prevents a perfect score.

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