adb_clear_logcat

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it declares the operation is permanent, that all buffered entries are lost, that future dumps start from zero, and that the return value is a confirmation message. It does not cover failure modes (no device connected, permission errors), so it falls just short of full disclosure.

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 English text is front-loaded and tight, but the entire description is duplicated in Spanish, so roughly half the content is redundant for any single-language agent. The core content earns its place; the verbatim translation does not.

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 zero-parameter, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description covers purpose, destructive impact, ordering guidance, and the response shape. Only edge-case behavior (what happens on a disconnected device) is unaddressed, which is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.

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 is 4. There is nothing for the description to compensate for, and it correctly adds no parameter detail.

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 and resource ('Permanently clears the device logcat buffer'), names the underlying command (logcat -c), and implies its counterpart by contrasting with 'subsequent dumps start fresh'. An agent can distinguish this from the sibling adb_get_logcat without opening any schema.

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?

'Run it before capturing a clean log stream' gives an explicit when-to-use condition that implicitly routes the agent to adb_get_logcat afterwards. It stops short of naming the sibling tool or stating when not to call it, but the sequencing guidance is clear and actionable.

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