clear_workspace

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It openly states that 'Matrices and results from earlier calls are lost' and warns to save data first. This fully communicates the destructive nature and the only side effect, making it 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?

The description is compact and front-loaded: the first line states the core action and purpose, followed by a succinct warning. Every sentence delivers useful information with zero fluff.

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 tool has no parameters, an output schema exists, and the description covers the essential behavior and warns about data loss, it is fully complete for its purpose. No additional context is necessary.

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 has 0 parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter syntax or meaning since none exist. It correctly avoids introducing extraneous parameter details.

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: 'Discard every symbol' with a specific resource (workspace). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_symbols or get_matrix by focusing on clearing all symbols. Verbatim evidence: 'Discard every symbol, so the next run starts from an empty workspace.'

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 context: it is used before a new run to start fresh. It implicitly states when to use (when you want a clean slate) and includes an important precondition: 'Write anything worth keeping to a file first.' It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, but for a simple clear operation this is adequate.

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