clear_cookies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It says nothing about what gets cleared (all cookies, domain-specific, session vs persistent), whether the operation is destructive or reversible, or any side effects, making it behaviorally opaque.

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 mere fragment with no structure. The unexplained '(alias)' adds noise without earning its place, and while short, it is under-specified rather than concise.

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 mutation-style tool that clears browser state, the description is incomplete. It omits what cookies are affected, when to use it, and any behavioral context, which is especially important given there are no annotations or output schema to compensate.

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 and an empty schema with 100% description coverage, so per the rubric baseline is 4. There are no parameter semantics to clarify, and the description adds nothing needed here.

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 'Clear Cookies(alias)' essentially restates the tool name, making it a tautology rather than a distinct statement of purpose. It does not differentiate this tool from siblings like clear_storage, cookies, or set_cookie, so an agent cannot tell when this specific tool is appropriate.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as clear_storage or set_cookie. The description provides no context, exclusions, or prerequisites, leaving usage entirely to inference from the name.

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