Clear Logs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Wipe' clearly communicates a destructive cleanup of both console and network buffers, which is useful, but it omits permissions, irreversibility, and whether clearing affects only the given tab or broader session state.

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 front-loaded and extremely compact: purpose first, then use context, then a concrete example. Every element is brief and directly useful, with no filler.

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 destructive cleanup tool, the core action and post-action use case are present, and the output schema can carry return-value details. Still, the lack of annotations and the unelaborated tab_id parameter leave gaps around prerequisites and scope.

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%, so the description must compensate for the single required tab_id parameter. The example clear_logs('t0') shows the parameter's format as a tab identifier, but it does not explain where to obtain the tab id or clarify its role beyond a bare example.

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 states a specific verb and resource: wipe console and network buffers. It is clearly distinguishable from getter siblings like get_console_logs and get_network_requests, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 phrase 'For clean post-action trace' gives an implied use context, so the agent can infer it is used after an action to reset logs. However, it does not specify when not to use it or name sibling alternatives such as get_console_logs when the goal is inspection rather than clearing.

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