clear_selected_ui_system

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does disclose the main action and optional file removal. However, it omits side effects such as irreversibility, behavior when no selection exists, and whether the active-selection state is affected when removePersisted is false.

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 a single sentence with the primary action front-loaded and the optional condition clearly appended. Every clause contributes value, and there is no filler or redundancy.

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 tool with two optional parameters and no required fields, the description adequately covers the core behavior and the optional destructive action. Minor gaps include edge-case behavior (e.g., what happens if there is no active selection) and return values, but these are not critical given the schema richness.

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 the baseline is 3. The description mostly paraphrases the removePersisted parameter behavior and adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides for either parameter.

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 uses the specific verb 'Clear' and identifies the resource as the 'currently active UI system selection', which clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like select_ui_system and get_selected_ui_system. It also mentions the optional removal of the .ui-system.json file, adding another layer of specificity.

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 description implies the use case—clearing the active selection—and communicates the condition for the removePersisted option, but it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or state when not to use this tool. The usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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