brc_clear_audit_log

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It fully discloses the destructive nature and the required confirmation flow. Lacks a detail like what 'payload preview' contains, but overall transparent.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, no redundancy, every sentence carries essential 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 destructive action tool with no output schema, the description covers the entire expected behavior: what first call returns, what user must do, and consequences. No significant gaps.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds workflow context for confirmWrite (first call false, retry with true after user confirmation), which adds value beyond schema descriptions. Does not mention confirmClear explicitly, but schema covers it.

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?

Description clearly states 'Clear the Red audit log for this MCP server session' – a specific verb ('clear') and resource ('Red audit log'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like brc_list_audit_log.

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?

Exactly describes the two-step process: first call without confirmWrite:true returns a confirmation request, then retry with confirmWrite:true after user confirmation. Also warns that 'passing preflight is not confirmation'.

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