log_clear

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. While 'Clear' implies a destructive action, the description omits explicit warnings about data loss, irreversibility, or what happens to existing log entries.

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 consists of exactly two sentences with zero waste: the first defines the action, and the second defines the usage context. It is appropriately front-loaded and sized for a simple parameter-less tool.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description adequately covers its purpose and usage context. It is slightly incomplete regarding the destructive implications of clearing logs, which would be helpful given the absence of destructiveHint annotations.

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 contains zero parameters. Per the scoring rules, 0 params equals a baseline score of 4, as there are no parameter semantics to elaborate upon.

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 a specific verb ('Clear') with a specific resource ('the session log') and distinguishes itself from siblings 'log_read' and 'log_write' by describing a destructive reset action rather than read/write operations.

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 second sentence ('Use this at the start of a new task') provides explicit temporal guidance for when to invoke the tool. It lacks explicit 'when-not-to-use' guidance or named alternatives (e.g., contrasting with log_write for appending), preventing a perfect score.

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