clear_all

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the destructive action and what remains, but omits details about the dry_run parameter, permissions required, reversibility, or any side effects. More context would improve safety awareness.

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 sentences efficiently convey the purpose and a key requirement. No extraneous information; front-loaded with the primary action.

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 tool with two simple parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior. It misses some completeness (e.g., dry_run effect, permissions), but is largely sufficient.

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 schema already describes both parameters. The description adds minimal value by reiterating that confirm must be true for deletion, but does not explain dry_run behavior. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 deletes all graph memory data for the current tenant, specifying both what it does and what it does not affect (API keys, tenant metadata). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like clear_project or clear_session, which likely have similar but scoped behavior.

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 mentions that confirm=true is required, providing one guideline. However, it lacks explicit context on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as clear_project or clear_session, and gives no 'when-not' guidance.

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