sql_editor_history_clear

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

The word 'Empty' signals permanent deletion of history data, which sits uneasily with destructiveHint=false; the description discloses nothing about reversibility, scope (all history vs. one workspace), or whether the operation can be undone. readOnlyHint=false is consistent with a mutating tool, so the contradiction is partial rather than total.

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 no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately short for a zero-argument tool, though that brevity is exactly why neither scope nor irreversibility is covered.

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 data-deleting tool with no annotations covering reversibility and no output schema, the description should state scope and whether the action is permanent. As written, an agent cannot tell the blast radius of calling 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 takes zero parameters, so the schema baseline of 4 applies and there is nothing further the description could reasonably add about arguments.

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 ('Empty') plus specific resource ('the SQL Editor's run history') makes the action unambiguous. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings such as sql_editor_history or query_history, nor clarify whether it clears all history or just the current session's.

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 indication of when this tool should be invoked versus the read-oriented sql_editor_history / query_history siblings, and no warning about irreversibility or confirmation requirements. The agent gets the what but not the when or the caution.

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