clear_memory

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'use with caution' for 'clearAll', hinting at destructive behavior, but lacks details on permissions, side effects, error handling, or what 'clear' entails (e.g., permanent deletion, soft delete). This is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core functionality ('clear a specific memory by key, or clear all memories for a project') with zero waste. Every word earns its place.

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's complexity (mutation with potential destructive effects), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It should address behavioral aspects like safety, confirmation needs, or return values, but does not, leaving critical gaps for agent understanding.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying that 'key' and 'project' are mutually exclusive modes, but this is not explicitly stated. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb 'clear' and the resource 'memory/memories', specifying two modes: by key or by project. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_memories' or 'save_memory' in terms of purpose, though the action 'clear' is distinct from 'list' or 'save'.

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 like 'list_memories' or 'save_memory', nor does it mention prerequisites, dependencies, or exclusions. It only describes what the tool does, not when it's appropriate.

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