emotion_reset_all

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

The description implies destructive behavior ('clear', 'reset') but does not explicitly state whether the action is irreversible, affects all users globally, or requires special permissions. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and falls short by omitting these critical consequences.

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, front-loaded sentence with a warning symbol, efficiently conveying the core action. Every word adds value without redundancy, making it appropriately concise for a zero-parameter tool.

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 zero-parameter tool, the description is minimally viable but leaves gaps: it does not define what 'reset' returns to (default state?), whether the action is reversible, or how it differs from emotion_reset. While the essential behavior is clear, the absence of these contextual details prevents a higher score.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the input schema is empty. Per baseline rules, 0 params warrant a score of 4. The description adds no parameter-specific information because none exist, but it clearly conveys the tool's global scope.

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 identifies the action: clearing all user emotion profiles and resetting the robot's own emotion. It uses specific verbs (清除/重置) and names the exact resources affected, distinguishing it from sibling tools like emotion_reset through the scope 'all'.

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 vs. alternatives such as emotion_reset. The warning emoji hints at caution but does not explicitly state conditions or exclusions. There is no mention of prerequisites or scenarios where this tool should be avoided.

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