emulators_clear

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it front-loads 'DESTRUCTIVE' and spells out the blast radius down to Auth tenants, Pub/Sub schemas and messages, and Cloud Tasks history. It omits whether the operation requires elevated auth/permissions, whether it is reversible, and what the response contains.

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 sentences: a front-loaded DESTRUCTIVE warning followed by the multi-service safeguard. The parenthetical enumeration is dense but every clause names a distinct destructive surface, so nothing is wasted.

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 high-risk bulk-mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the definition covers the crucial parts: what is destroyed and the confirmation requirement. It could still note whether this targets only the local emulator environment and what the tool returns after clearing.

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 schema already documents all three parameters. The description reinforces the confirmProject safeguard but adds no meaning beyond the schema for sections or runTriggers (the 'Firestore only' note is already in the schema).

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?

Specific verb (delete) plus an exhaustive enumeration of the resources affected across all five services, so an agent knows exactly what the tool wipes. It is clearly distinguishable from narrower siblings like firestore_delete, storage_delete, or auth_delete_user, which operate on individual records.

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 states the confirmProject prerequisite for multi-service clears, which is real usage guidance, but it never says when to pick this tool over the granular delete siblings (e.g., clearing only some documents). No exclusions or 'do not use when' guidance is offered.

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