bridge_forget

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

Fully discloses behavioral traits: session is dropped, next call starts fresh, in-flight call finishes but its state update is discarded. With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so completely.

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?

Three sentences, no wasted words. The main action is front-loaded, and each sentence adds essential 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?

Covers core behavior and parameter use. An output schema exists, so no need to explain return values. Could mention error conditions (e.g., invalid thread name), but overall complete for a simple tool.

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 has 0% description coverage, but the description fully explains the single parameter 'thread': passing a name forgets that thread, omitting forgets all. This exceeds the schema's contribution.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Drop' and resource 'thread's session', with explicit distinction between forgetting one thread or all. The action is unique among siblings (ask_codebase, bridge_cost), so purpose is unambiguous.

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?

Provides clear usage patterns (pass thread name or omit for all), but no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description explains behavior but does not contrast with other tools or indicate when not to use it.

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