hosts_clear

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Clear' implies a destructive action, but the description does not state whether it requires elevated privileges, whether it is reversible, or what exactly constitutes 'managed' entries. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys its purpose without any wasted words. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple tool with no parameters.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not explain what 'managed' means (e.g., entries previously added via hosts_add), whether clearing affects all entries or only specific ones, or what the result/response looks like. More context is needed for the agent to invoke it safely and correctly.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters since there are none. It correctly adds no parameter-specific information, and the schema already covers everything.

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 tool's action ('Clear') and resource ('managed /etc/hosts entries'), making it immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like hosts_add, hosts_remove, and hosts_list. It specifies scope ('managed') which adds precision.

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 usage is implied: when you need to clear managed hosts entries, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like hosts_remove or hosts_list. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, but the action is straightforward enough that the implied usage is sufficient.

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