chatgpt_clear_circuit_breaker

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states that the tool only clears local state and does not access the web, which is valuable behavioral context. It also emphasizes the safety precondition of user confirmation. It does not detail side effects or response behavior, but for this simple local utility the key traits are 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?

The description is a single, tightly scoped sentence that front-loads the essential condition and clearly states the action. Every word earns its place; there is no redundant or vague filler.

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 single-parameter, low-complexity tool, the description provides enough context: what it does, when it should be used, and a key behavioral guarantee. The only minor gap is lack of detail about the operation's result or side effects, but that is not critical for this local clearing 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the parameter adequately. The description reinforces that 'confirmed' must represent user confirmation, but it does not add significant meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('清除'/clear) and a specific resource ('本地安全熔断'/local safety circuit breaker), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It also adds the key condition that this happens only after user confirmation. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like chatgpt_circuit_breaker_status, which reports status rather than clearing it.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: only after the user has manually confirmed the ChatGPT rate-limit prompt has disappeared. It also clarifies that it does not access the web, which implies it is not a network-testing tool. However, it does not name specific alternatives or provide explicit 'when not to use' guidance beyond the confirmation condition.

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