acs_clear_trace_log

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral impact. It states the tool clears the trace log, implying a destructive action, and explains the purpose of obtaining clean logs for the next Inform. It does not mention irreversibility or side effects, but the verb '清空' is sufficiently explicit for this simple operation.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the primary action. Every part contributes useful information: the action, the resource, and the usage sequence. No wasted words.

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, no-output-schema tool, the description is complete. It explains what the tool does, why it is useful, and the exact sequence of usage with related tools. No additional information is needed for an agent to correctly select and invoke it.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the input schema is empty. The description adds context beyond the schema by explaining the intended workflow and association with acs_connection_request. Baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description meets this.

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 clearly states the action ('清空' = clear) and the specific resource ('trace.log'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like acs_get_trace_log which reads the log. It unambiguously identifies the tool's function.

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 explicitly provides a usage workflow: '先清空 → 发 CR → 再查看 trace.log' (clear first, then send connection request, then view log). This tells the agent exactly when to use this tool and its role relative to acs_connection_request and acs_get_trace_log.

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