clear

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action and default color but does not mention that clearing is destructive, whether it can be undone, how it interacts with named canvases, or what happens to existing content.

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 clear sentence with no filler. The core action and default behavior are front-loaded, and every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple and the schema fully documents its two optional parameters, but for a destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description should clarify undoability or irreversible effects. It is adequate for basic invocation but leaves important behavioral context implicit.

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 both parameters are already documented. The description adds only the 'entire canvas' scope and reiterates the transparent default, providing minimal extra meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Uses a specific verb ('Clear') and identifies the exact resource ('the entire canvas') and the color parameter. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like set_pixel and fill_rect, though it does not explicitly name them.

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 phrase 'entire canvas' implies this is for whole-canvas resets rather than partial drawing operations, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and does not reference alternatives such as fill_rect or undo.

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