pin_clear_all

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

With no annotations, the description does disclose the destructive scope (all pin mappings are removed) and the persistence behavior ('optionally re-save the .ioc'), which is genuinely useful. It stops short of saying whether the clear is undoable, whether it needs an open project, or what happens to downstream configuration tied to those pins.

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 with the destructive action first and the optional persistence second. No filler.

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 bulk destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essentials — what is cleared and whether it is saved — but leaves out irreversibility, prerequisites, and any warning about losing existing pin assignments. An agent could call it correctly but without full awareness of consequences.

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%, so both parameters are already documented, including save's default of true. The description adds a modest clarification that save=false skips persisting the .ioc, but adds nothing beyond that; baseline 3 applies.

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 scope: 'Remove every pin mapping', and names the underlying command (`clearpinout`). The word 'every' distinguishes it from per-pin siblings like pin_reset and pin_set, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied — an agent can infer this is the bulk-clear tool versus pin_reset for individual pins, but the description never says when to prefer one over the other, nor does it state prerequisites such as the project being open.

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