colab_notebook_clear_outputs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that only 'saved outputs' are cleared, but says nothing about reversibility, required permissions/session state, or side effects on a running kernel. This is thin for a mutation tool.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the action and its two scopes come first. It is appropriately sized for a two-parameter tool, though the 'one cell, or of all cells' clause could have been stated more crisply as a default behavior.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the core action is covered. However, with no annotations and no schema descriptions, the definition omits prerequisites and side-effect details an agent would want before invoking a destructive-output operation.

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 compensate. It partially does by implying the semantic split between the optional 'cell' (clear that one cell) and its absence/null (clear all cells, matching the null default), but 'path' and the exact cell identifier format are left unexplained.

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 ('Clear') and resource ('saved outputs') with the scope made explicit ('one cell, or of all cells'). It is distinguishable from siblings like colab_notebook_edit_cell or colab_notebook_delete_cell, though it never names or contrasts an alternative directly.

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 explains the two operating modes but gives no when-to-use guidance, prerequisites (e.g., does the notebook need to be open or a session active?), or pointers to alternative tools. An agent must infer context entirely.

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