Clear stored logs

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

The annotations already supply the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false), so the description only needs to add context. It usefully states that both logs and errors are wiped and that the wipe can be scoped to a single client, but it says nothing about permanence or recoverability, which is exactly the open question for a clearing operation that annotations label non-destructive.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence stating the verb, the resources, and the scope options. No filler, no repetition of the title.

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 one-optional-parameter tool with no output schema and full annotation coverage, the definition covers what is cleared and at what granularity, which is sufficient to invoke it correctly. It misses only a note on irreversibility and on what is returned after the clear.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter already documents the 'default: all' behaviour in its description. The phrase "for all clients or only for one" mirrors that schema text, so the description adds almost no meaning beyond it; baseline 3 is correct.

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?

"Clear the logs and errors stored in the bridge" names a specific verb (clear) and specific resources (logs, errors) plus the scope (bridge), which is enough to distinguish it from the read-only siblings get_logs/get_errors. No sibling is named explicitly, so it stops short of a 5.

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 only explains the scope choice (all clients vs one); it never says when an agent should call this instead of get_logs/get_errors/find_instances or what preconditions apply. Usage is left to inference from the verb.

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