clean_monitor_data

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet it says nothing about what is actually cleaned, whether deletion is permanent, what auth is required, or what the result is. For a clearly destructive-sounding operation, this is a serious gap.

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 three words and not bloated, but its brevity reflects under-specification rather than efficient communication. There is no front-loaded purpose, scope, or consequence to justify the length.

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?

No annotations, no output schema, and no parameter detail mean the description is the only information source, and it supplies none. An agent cannot safely invoke a data-cleaning operation on this basis.

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 defines zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify; the baseline of 4 applies. No parameter meaning is lost because none exist.

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 'Clean monitor data' only restates the tool name with the underscore removed; it adds no scope, target, or effect detail. While 'clean' and 'monitor data' hint at a verb and resource, an agent learns nothing it could not infer from the identifier itself.

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 when-to-use guidance and no mention of siblings such as get_monitor_data, get_monitor_setting, or update_monitor_setting. The description offers no condition or alternative that would help an agent choose this tool over its neighbors.

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