clear_selection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the scope of the operation (a single layer vs. every layer) but does not state whether clearing all layers is the default, that other layers are unaffected by a single-layer clear, or the reversibility/permission profile of the mutation.

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?

A single sentence with zero filler, and the layer-vs-all-layers distinction is front-loaded so the agent immediately grasps the two operating modes.

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?

With only two optional, fully documented parameters and an output schema covering return values, the description is nearly sufficient for correct invocation. It could explicitly note that all layers is the default and that the operation is state-only, but the core requirement is met.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both map_name and layer_name (with their 'defaults to active map' / 'default all layers' semantics) are already documented in the schema. The description's phrase 'one layer, or on every layer' adds a light restatement but no new syntax or format detail, so baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb ('clear') and resource ('selection') plus the scope (one layer or every layer in the map). This is clear and allows an agent to infer it is the inverse of set_selection, but it does not name that sibling explicitly to harden the distinction.

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?

Usage is only implied – one reads that you call this when you want to deselect. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or reference to set_selection/zoom_to_selection as the alternative. Adequate but leaves routing to inference.

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