purge_fact

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the destructive nature ('purge') and the confirmation flag, but lacks details on side effects, authorization needs, or what happens on failure. The confirm requirement is a positive transparency point.

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 two short sentences. The first states the purpose, the second adds a critical usage requirement. There is no unnecessary information.

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?

Given the destructive nature, 3 parameters, and existence of an output schema, the description covers the core action and key requirement (confirm). However, it lacks details on parameter interactions, default behavior when no parameters are provided, and the meaning of scope values.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must add meaning. It explains that 'id' is for a single fact and 'scope' for all facts in a scope, and highlights 'confirm'. However, it does not clarify behavior when both are provided, or explain the scope enum values ('project', 'global').

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 clearly states the tool purges facts either by id or by scope, using the verb 'purge' and specifying the resource. It distinguishes from siblings like remember_fact and list_facts, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 provides a key guideline: 'Requires confirm=True to execute.' This is helpful for safe usage. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like remember_fact or list_facts, nor does it mention prerequisites or conditions.

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