mhangani_clear

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. While 'Delete all' clearly indicates a destructive action, it fails to mention that the deletion is irreversible, whether it affects only audits/history or also other data like baselines and trends, or if any confirmation is required. This is a significant gap for a destructive 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?

The description is a single, concise sentence that front-loads the action 'Delete all' and immediately specifies the target and location. It contains no unnecessary words or repetition, making it highly scannable.

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 zero-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is largely complete: it states the operation and the data affected. However, it leaves ambiguity about whether 'audits and history' includes all data types (e.g., baselines), and it does not mention irreversibility, which would enhance completeness for a destructive command.

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, and the description clarifies the scope of the operation ('all stored audits and history in ~/.mhangani'), which is sufficient since there is nothing else to document. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description adds no conflicting or missing parameter information.

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 uses the specific verb 'Delete' with a clear resource ('all stored audits and history') and location ('~/.mhangani'), making the tool's purpose unmistakable. It differentiates from sibling tools like mhangani_history and mhangani_report, which likely read or report rather than delete.

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, no prerequisites, and no warning about when it should be avoided. The only implied usage comes from the imperative 'Delete,' but no explicit context or exclusions are provided, leaving agents to infer when this destructive action is appropriate.

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