clear_checked

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the destructive nature (removing items), but lacks details about reversibility, permissions, or impact on other data. Adequate but not thorough.

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 very concise (one short sentence) and front-loaded with the action. However, it omits parameter details, which would improve completeness without adding much length.

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?

Given the single optional parameter and many sibling tools, the description lacks crucial context: what happens when list_name is null, which list is affected, and any output schema details. It is insufficient for confident tool invocation.

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 0%, yet the description does not explain the 'list_name' parameter or how to use it. It only mentions 'en lista' generically, adding no semantic value to the parameter.

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: removing all checked-off items from a list. It uses a specific verb ('Ta bort' = remove) and resource ('avbockade varor' = checked-off items), distinguishing it from siblings like 'check_off' and 'remove_item'.

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 implies usage as a cleanup step after checking items off ('rensa upp efter handling'), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'remove_item' or when not to use it.

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