uidf.clear_user_var_value

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It does not state whether 'clearing' is destructive or reversible, what side effects occur (e.g., affects runtime state), or what happens if the variable doesn't exist. The term 'clear' implies modification, but no safety or persistence details are given.

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 very short (5 words), front-loading the action effectively. However, its brevity sacrifices clarity and completeness, making it under-specified rather than efficiently concise. Earns a 4 for being brief, but loses points for missing critical detail.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and sits among many similar uidf and memory tools, the description is incomplete. It does not clarify return behavior, error cases, or relation to other variable manipulation tools, leaving a significant gap for an agent.

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 bears full burden for parameter meaning. It mentions 'function user variable value' generically but does not explain critical parameters like 'def_addr' (integer/string, purpose unclear), 'after' (boolean, role not specified), or 'function_start'. This forces the agent to guess semantics.

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 'Clear function user variable value' uses a clear verb ('clear') and resource ('function user variable value'), making the basic action understandable. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'uidf.set_user_var_value' or 'uidf.list_user_var_values', missing an opportunity to clarify scope or intent.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., must have a valid session or variable), no exclusions, and no reference to sibling tools like 'memory.remove' or 'uidf.set_user_var_value', leaving the agent without usage context.

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