lightprobe-clear

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It explains the default filter and the removeAll option but does not mention that the operation is destructive, irreversible, or has no undo. Some behavioral context is added beyond the schema, but safety implications are missing.

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 extremely concise with two sentences. It front-loads the purpose and immediately provides conditional usage. No unnecessary words.

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 parameter, no output schema), the description covers the main behavior and parameter. It lacks mention of prerequisites like an open scene, error conditions, or that the removal is immediate, but it is reasonably complete for a basic 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?

The parameter removeAll is fully described: its type, default value, and effect. The description reiterates and clarifies the default behavior, adding value over the schema alone. Schema coverage is 100%, and the description enhances understanding.

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 action ('Remove'), the resource ('LightProbeGroup GameObjects'), and the context ('auto-generated', from scene). It distinguishes from sibling tools that perform other light probe operations like baking or configuring.

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?

Guidance is provided on default behavior (only auto-generated) and the optional flag to remove all groups. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use or suggest alternatives, the context is sufficient for a straightforward removal tool.

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