clear_cart_config

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the destructive scope, the refusal on orders/carts, and the effect of force, while adding a safety confirmation requirement. It stops short of stating irreversibility explicitly or listing exactly which settings are removed, but the core behavior is well covered.

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?

Three purpose-driven sentences structure the description: what it does, when it may be called, and how to handle the blocked case. Every sentence adds information without repetition or fluff.

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 config-clearing tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose, safety, error behavior, and alternatives. The main residual gap is the lack of a success-response description and a slightly broad reference to 'commerce settings' relative to the tool's cart-config name.

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 single parameter is 100% documented in the input schema, including the refusal condition and the fact that force overrides it. The description reinforces that with retry guidance, but does not add substantial new parameter semantics beyond the schema's own description.

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 names a clear verb ('Remove') and resource ('workspace's commerce settings'), with a concrete end state ('back to never-configured'). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling update_cart_config by stating that tool handles individual settings changes.

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?

It explicitly instructs to call only after explicit user confirmation, and provides a concrete retry path for the refused case ('retry with force: true only once they confirm'). It also names the alternative for partial changes, leaving no ambiguity about when to choose this tool.

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