forget_my_data

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does well on blast radius: it names exactly what is destroyed (local playlist cache, optionally the saved Spotify login) and explicitly reassures that Spotify-side data is untouched. It omits consequences an agent would want, such as whether re-login/connect_spotify is required afterwards and whether the cache must be rebuilt with load_playlists.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the primary effect and then the optional flag, ending with the most important safety clarification. No redundant or filler wording.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is unnecessary, and the description covers the destructive scope and the flag well for a one-parameter tool. It stops short of describing post-deletion state (needs re-auth, cache rebuild), which would fully close the loop.

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 0% and the single optional boolean has no description in the schema, so the description must compensate — and it does, spelling out that also_log_out additionally removes the saved Spotify login credential. The only gap is not saying what state the app lands in after logout.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — deleting the local playlist cache — and adds a scope boundary ('Nothing on Spotify is changed') that prevents an agent from mistaking it for a remote mutation. It does not name how it differs from the nearby siblings unload_playlists or reset_progress, which also sound like local-state clears.

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 gives clear conditional semantics for the optional flag ('With also_log_out, delete the saved Spotify login too'), which implies when to set it. It never says when to call this tool at all versus unload_playlists or reset_progress, so the primary routing decision is left to inference.

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