clear_trigger_group

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Trigger' implies an action that initiates something, but it doesn't specify whether this is a read-only or destructive operation, what permissions are required, what side effects occur, or what the expected outcome is. The description is too vague to inform the agent about behavioral traits.

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 with a single sentence that directly states the tool's action. There is no wasted language or unnecessary elaboration, making it front-loaded and efficient in structure.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It fails to explain what 'triggering' entails, what a 'clear group' is, or what the result of the operation might be. Given the complexity implied by the sibling tools and the lack of structured data, the description does not provide sufficient context for effective 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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'id' parameter clearly documented as 'The ID of the clear group to trigger'. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what the schema provides, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage, resulting in a baseline score 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 'Trigger a specific clear group' is essentially a tautology that restates the tool name 'clear_trigger_group' with minimal elaboration. It provides a verb ('trigger') and resource ('clear group'), but lacks specificity about what 'trigger' means in this context or what distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'clear_layer' or 'clear_get_group'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools that involve triggering operations (e.g., 'trigger_active_group', 'trigger_focused_group', 'playlists_trigger'), the description offers no context about appropriate use cases, prerequisites, or distinctions from related tools.

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