clear_vram

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explains the tool's effect (freeing VRAM by unloading models and freeing memory) and mentions the optionality of unloading only one component. This is adequately transparent.

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?

Two sentences: first states the action and reason, second gives usage context and parameter flexibility. No redundant words, perfectly front-loaded.

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 simplicity of the tool (no nested objects, no output schema), the description is nearly complete. It could mention return value (e.g., success status) but it's not essential for a VRAM-clearing action.

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 100% with descriptions for both boolean parameters. The description adds value by explaining they can be used independently ('Optionally unload only models or only memory'), giving practical guidance 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?

The description clearly states the verb (Free) and resource (GPU VRAM by unloading cached models). It also distinguishes the tool's context (between generation runs with different model families or when low on VRAM), which sets it apart from sibling tools.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use: between generation runs with different model families or when low on VRAM. While it doesn't list alternatives or when not to use, the context is clear and sufficient for a specialized cleanup tool.

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