Reset Agent Vault

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and does well: it discloses the destructive sweep scope, the notable fact that the vault is not decrypted, and the required confirmation gates. The only gap is that irreversibility of the loss is implied by 'Forget' but never stated outright.

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 front-loaded sentences: what it does, when to use it, and the preconditions. Every sentence earns its place with no filler or repetition.

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 destructive no-annotation tool with no output schema, the description covers the scope of destruction, the non-decryption behavior, and the confirmation requirement. Only minor omissions remain, such as whether the state is recoverable or what the vault file becomes afterward.

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 100%, so both parameters are already fully documented in the schema. The description restates confirm=true and confirmationText=RESET_AGENT_VAULT, adding no meaning beyond the structured fields. 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 verb ('Forget') plus the exact resources it sweeps: all local agent wallets, delegations, and the default agent profile. The bulk scope ('all') distinguishes it from single-item siblings like agent_delete_wallet and agent_delete_delegation without opening their schemas.

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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use trigger ('intentionally want a fresh agent-wallet setup') and a concrete motivating scenario ('after removing an old env vault secret'). It does not name a specific alternative or state when NOT to use it, so it falls short of a 5.

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