clear_console_logs

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. While 'Clear' implies a destructive action, the description doesn't specify whether this operation is reversible, what permissions are needed, or what happens to the logs (permanent deletion vs temporary clearing). It also doesn't mention any side effects or error conditions, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

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 a single, focused sentence with zero wasted words. It's perfectly front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it immediately understandable without any unnecessary elaboration. Every word earns its place in conveying the essential purpose.

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?

For a destructive operation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what 'captured' means (implying prior capture setup), what happens after clearing, whether there's confirmation or feedback, or how this interacts with the console logging system. Given the complexity of a mutation tool in a browser automation context, more behavioral context is needed.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage and only one optional parameter, the description doesn't need to explain parameters. The schema already documents that 'pageId' is optional and defaults to the active page. The description appropriately focuses on the tool's purpose rather than repeating parameter information, which is efficient given the comprehensive schema coverage.

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 'Clear captured console logs' clearly states the verb ('Clear') and resource ('captured console logs'), making the tool's purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from its sibling 'clear_network_logs' beyond the resource name, which is why it doesn't achieve a perfect score.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites like needing to have console capture started first (via 'start_console_capture'), nor does it clarify the relationship with 'get_console_logs' for viewing logs before clearing. There's no explicit when/when-not usage context provided.

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