flutter_clean

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('clean') but doesn't describe what 'clean' entails (e.g., irreversible deletion, time-consuming operation, potential side effects on project state), nor does it mention permissions, rate limits, or output behavior. This is inadequate for a tool that likely modifies the file system.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('clean') and resources. There is no wasted verbiage, repetition, or unnecessary elaboration, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick comprehension.

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 complexity (a tool that likely performs file system operations), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to address critical aspects like what 'clean' means in practice, safety considerations, or expected outcomes, leaving significant gaps for the agent to infer behavior.

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 description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides (schema coverage is 100% with a clear description for 'cwd'). However, with only one parameter, the baseline is high, and the description doesn't contradict or confuse the schema, so it scores well despite not adding extra value.

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 ('clean') and the resources ('Flutter build cache and generated files'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'flutter_fix_common_issues' or 'flutter_doctor' which might also perform cleanup operations, so it doesn't reach the highest 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 (e.g., after build failures, before releases), exclusions, or how it compares to siblings like 'flutter_fix_common_issues' for cache-related issues. This leaves the agent with minimal context for decision-making.

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