clear_canvas

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It states the action (remove all elements) and scope (current page), but fails to mention irreversibility, potential data loss, or any warnings. For a destructive tool, this is a significant gap; an agent would not know to warn the user that the operation is permanent.

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 sentence that front-loads the action ('Remove ALL elements') and adds a helpful parenthetical ('clean slate'). There is no redundancy or filler; every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple (no parameters, no output schema), but it is a destructive operation. The description specifies the scope ('current Figma page') but omits critical operational details like irreversibility or whether confirmation is required. Given the lack of annotations, the description is minimally viable but not complete for safe invocation.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema. With 0 parameters, the baseline is 4 because there is nothing to clarify. The description correctly focuses on the tool's effect rather than parameter details.

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 identifies the action ('Remove ALL elements') and the scope ('from the current Figma page'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling creation tools (create_line, create_frame, etc.) by being the only tool that deletes content, making its purpose unmistakable.

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 phrase 'clean slate' gives clear context for when to use the tool—when the agent needs to clear the entire page. There are no explicit exclusions or alternatives, but the sibling tools are all creation-focused, making this tool's role distinct. It lacks an explicit 'use this when' statement, but the usage is strongly implied.

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