clear_records

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Discard all rows' is direct and implies destructiveness, but it doesn't explicitly state whether the action is permanent/irreversible or whether it affects persistent storage. More transparency could include 'this cannot be undone' or 'clears only the current session's rows.'

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 two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the action, the second explains when to use it. Perfectly front-loaded and concise.

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 simple no-parameter tool with an output schema, the description explains both the function and the appropriate context. It is complete, covering the essential information an agent needs to decide when to invoke it.

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?

Zero parameters, and the schema is empty with 100% coverage. Per the rubric, a 0-param tool gets a baseline of 4. The description doesn't need to add parameter details, and none are added.

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's function: discarding all rows collected so far. The verb 'discard' combined with the resource 'rows' is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_record or get_records.

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?

It provides a clear use case: 'when starting over, e.g. you've been exploring one source and want to switch to another without mixing rows.' This gives explicit contextual guidance, though it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools.

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