selection_clear

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false), so the bar is lower. The description adds the useful scope detail that the clear is total ('everything') rather than partial, but says nothing about behavior when nothing is selected or the response shape.

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?

Two words, front-loaded, zero waste. For a no-argument state-reset tool this is exactly the right size, with no filler or restated name.

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 no parameters, full annotation coverage, and an output schema to describe the return, the description supplies everything needed to invoke the tool correctly. Only the edge case of clearing when nothing is selected is unaddressed.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for 0 params is 4 and nothing here undermines that.

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?

Names a specific action (deselect) and its object (everything), so an agent can tell it clears the selection rather than modifying it. It is distinguishable from selection_set and selection_get by semantics, though it never names them explicitly.

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 use case is implied clearly enough — call this to wipe the current selection — but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer it over selection_set with an empty list, and no mention of preconditions or side effects.

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