dlq_purge

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

With no annotations, the description is the sole source of behavioral context. It states the scope ('all entries') but omits critical details about the destructive nature, such as permanence or inability to undo. The word 'purge' implies danger but the description does not explicitly warn.

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 entire description is a single, clear sentence: 'Remove all entries from the dead-letter queue.' It contains no filler or redundant information.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers the primary action but misses important context such as return value and permanence. It is mostly adequate but would benefit from a warning or clarification about the irreversible nature.

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 accepts no parameters, so the schema is minimal. The description's phrase 'all entries' reinforces the lack of filtering options, which aligns with an empty schema. This meets the baseline for zero-parameter tools.

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 uses the specific verb 'Remove' and specifies the resource 'all entries from the dead-letter queue.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like dlq_list (listing) and dlq_retry (retrying).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as dlq_retry or dlq_list. The description does not mention prerequisites, warnings, or conditions that would help an agent decide.

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