TouchDesigner Clear Network

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the destructive action (delete), the confined scope (only sandbox), and the operational dependency (bridge running). It does not cover reversibility or error states, but for a simple clearing tool, this is adequate.

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 with no waste. The first sentence delivers the core action, and the second adds constraints and prerequisites. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description covers all necessary context: what it does, where it operates, what it excludes, and a prerequisite. Complete for its complexity level.

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 schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add significant extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter description, but it confirms the default path and intent. No additional value added.

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 'delete', the resource 'every operator inside the live-control sandbox COMP', and the scope 'only clears operators within the sandbox'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like td_delete by specifying the batch-clearing nature.

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 explicitly states when to use (clearing the sandbox) and what it will not affect (rest of project). It mentions a prerequisite (bridge running) and references td_status for checking. While it does not name an alternative sibling directly, the context implies td_delete for individual removals.

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