terse_alias_clear

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys session-scoped blast radius, but omits that the operation is destructive/irreversible, whether it affects only the current session vs persisted aliases, and what happens if no aliases are defined.

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?

One short sentence with zero waste and the target scope front-loaded. It is arguably too terse for a destructive no-argument operation, but nothing is padded or redundant.

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 zero-parameter destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description gives the operation and its scope but not the risk profile an agent needs before invoking it. The missing irreversibility warning keeps it at minimum-viable rather than complete.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain and the baseline applies. The description usefully clarifies that the target set is all session aliases rather than a named subset.

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 ("session $aliases"), scoped to session rather than global state. It is clearly distinguishable from a define or list operation by verb alone, though it never names or contrasts a sibling explicitly.

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?

No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative is given. Nothing tells the agent whether this is a reset between runs, a cleanup step, or how it relates to terse_alias_define/terse_alias_list.

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