proxypi_clear

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the destructive action 'Clear all stored healing records' and the scope 'all', but it does not explicitly warn that this is irreversible or that it permanently deletes all data. The core behavior is transparent, but safety-critical context 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, direct sentence with no superfluous words. It front-loads the verb 'Clear' and immediately specifies the object and scope, achieving maximum conciseness.

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, no-output-schema tool, the description adequately covers the core action and its scope. It lacks an explicit irreversibility warning, but given the simplicity of 'clear all', the description is largely complete for an agent to understand what the tool does.

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 with 100% coverage, so parameter semantics are not applicable. Per the rubric, the baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description correctly avoids inventing parameter details.

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 uses the specific verb 'Clear' and identifies the resource as 'all stored healing records from memory', making the tool's purpose immediately clear. This distinguishes it from siblings like proxypi_request, proxypi_history, and proxypi_replay, which imply different actions.

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 versus alternatives. The description only states the action, with no mention of scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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