Reset HTB Machine

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds real value on top: it spells out what destruction means ('wipes the box back to its initial state') and imposes a user-confirmation requirement, though it says nothing about duration, quotas, or whether the reset can be undone.

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?

Two compact sentences: the operation and default target come first, then the destructive warning. Nothing is padded and every clause carries information.

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 one-parameter destructive action with no output schema, the description covers the operation, the default target, and the confirmation requirement. It omits only minor operational details such as expected duration or post-reset state, which are not essential to invoking it correctly.

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% and the single parameter's own description already states 'omit to reset the active machine.' The description's default-target sentence largely repeats that, adding no new syntax or format detail, 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 verb and resource ('Reset a machine') plus the resulting scope ('to a fresh state'), which is unambiguous and easily separable from siblings like htb_machine_start, htb_machine_stop, or htb_machine_extend.

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?

Explains the default behavior when 'target' is omitted and adds a clear pre-call condition ('confirm with the user before calling'). It does not name an alternative tool for cases where a reset is not what the agent wants, but the context for use is explicit.

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