clear_memory

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the action and purpose but does not explain the consequences (e.g., whether all memories are deleted, if it is irreversible, or if it affects transcriptions). The word 'clear' hints at destruction but is insufficiently detailed.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and outcome. Every word contributes meaning, and there is no redundant or irrelevant 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?

Given the potentially destructive nature of clearing memory, the description lacks important context such as whether the operation is reversible, what exactly gets deleted, and success/failure behavior. No output schema exists, so the description should explain more. It is too sparse for safe usage.

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 input schema has no parameters, so the baseline for 0 parameters is 4. There is nothing to compensate for, and the description does not need to explain parameters.

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 a specific verb ('clear') and resource ('transcription memory'), and the purpose ('to free disk space') is explicitly stated. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like memory_stats or list_memories, which have 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?

The description implies usage when disk space needs to be freed, but it lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and does not mention alternatives. It gives a clear context but no exclusions or comparisons to sibling tools.

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