Result clear graph probes

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and readOnlyHint=false, so the mutation profile is covered structurally. The description contributes the scope detail that ALL probes are removed rather than a selected subset, but says nothing about confirmation, undo, or side effects on an active view. No contradiction with annotations.

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 four-word sentence that front-loads the action and object with zero filler. Nothing is wasted and nothing relevant is buried.

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 parameterless destructive operation with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate but thin: it does not indicate whether the clear is undoable, whether it affects only the current probe set, or what the caller should do afterward. An agent would be able to invoke it, but not confidently.

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 the baseline of 4 applies. The description's 'all' quantifier correctly signals there is no selection parameter to narrow the deletion.

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?

States a specific verb ('Remove') and resource ('graph probes') with the scope qualifier 'all', which distinguishes it from result_add_graph_probe. It does not explicitly name the sibling as a counterpart, but the clear add/clear pairing in the tool name makes the purpose 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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives, no mention of prerequisites, and no warning about the destructiveness or irreversibility of clearing every probe at once. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and annotations.

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