gitee_clear_repo

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It states the tool clears content and is destructive, but lacks details on what exactly is cleared (e.g., files, branches, issues, commits), whether the operation is reversible, or any side effects. The minimal description leaves significant behavioral ambiguity.

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 extremely concise—one sentence with an inline warning. It is front-loaded and to the point. While it could be slightly more informative, every word earns its place, and it avoids verbosity.

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 tool is destructive and has no output schema, the description is underdeveloped. It fails to explain the scope of content clearing (e.g., does it affect branches, tags, issues, settings?) or confirm irreversibility. More context is needed for safe and correct use.

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?

Both parameters (owner, repo) are fully described in the input schema with clear descriptions, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline of 3.

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 ('repository'), and adds the warning 'destructive!', which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like gitee_delete_repo (deletes repo entirely) and gitee_update_repo (modifies settings). The purpose is immediately understandable.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., gitee_delete_repo, gitee_create_file, gitee_update_file). The note 'destructive!' hints at caution but does not specify prerequisites, required permissions, or scenarios where this should be avoided.

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