clearLogs

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full responsibility. It clearly discloses the permanent, irreversible nature of the action and advises caution. It lacks additional behavioral details like rate limits or post-deletion state, but the main traits are 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?

The description is extremely concise with three short sentences: a warning, a statement, and a safety note. It is front-loaded with the most critical information and contains no redundant or irrelevant text.

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 tool's simplicity (one required parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description adequately covers purpose, behavior, and caution. It could mention the impact on associated analytics, but the core information is sufficient for an agent to invoke it 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already describes 'profile_id' as a 6-character alphanumeric identifier. The description does not add any new semantics or usage context for the parameter, so a baseline score of 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 clearly states the verb 'deletes', the resource 'all query logs', and the scope 'for this profile'. It is specific and distinguishes this destructive tool from sibling tools that are mostly get, add, update, or remove operations.

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 explicit warnings ('cannot be undone', 'use with caution') and a safety note ('only use with designated test profiles'). It implies appropriate usage context, though it does not directly reference alternative tools.

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