clear_checklist

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It transparently explains the core behavior: all items are unchecked and the items themselves remain. However, it does not disclose the force parameter's implication about potential rich-content loss, nor any persistence or side-effect details, which are meaningful 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?

Two focused sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by a concrete use case. No wasted words or redundant information.

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 simple operation with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context for tool selection and invocation. It could mention the force behavior, but the absence is not critical given the schema documents it and the core behavior is well described.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not reiterate parameter details, but the schema already fully documents 'note' and 'force.' The description's mention of 'checklist item' adds minimal extra semantic value.

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 exact action ('Uncheck every checklist item in a note') and the resource ('a note'). It differentiates from siblings like check_all_items by specifying 'uncheck' and noting that items are left in place, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 provides usage context: 'Use this to reset a recurring checklist, e.g. after a workout.' It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but the scenario is clear enough for an agent to know when to invoke this tool over similar checklist-related tools.

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