clip_clear_transcript

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

The description is consistent with the destructiveHint annotation, and the act of clearing is inherently destructive. However, it adds no additional behavioral context beyond the annotation—it does not clarify whether clearing is irreversible, whether it affects other clip data, or any side effects. With annotations covering the destructive nature, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a single, concise sentence of eight words. It front-loads the action and target without any filler or redundancy, making it highly efficient.

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 simple tool with one parameter, a destructive hint, and an existing output schema, the description adequately captures the core functionality. It lacks explicit usage guidance, but given the tool's simplicity, it is sufficiently complete. A few words about irreversibility or affected data would push it to 5.

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 schema already documents the sole parameter 'clip_name' with the description 'Name of the clip.' The tool description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, but since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb ('Clear') and resource ('transcript text') with a clear target ('from a clip'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like clip_transcribe_audio (which creates transcripts) and clip_get_transcript (which retrieves them), making its purpose unmistakable.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when to prefer this over clip_get_transcript or clip_transcribe_audio, nor does it state any prerequisites or side effects. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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