wipe_logs

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Clear all stored logs from memory' implies a destructive operation but doesn't specify permanence (irreversible?), scope (clears all types or just some?), side effects (affects performance?), or response behavior (confirmation?). For a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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 with no wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource. Every word earns its place, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 destructive nature, lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't address safety (e.g., confirmation prompts), return values (e.g., success status), or error handling. For a clear/wipe operation, more context is needed for reliable agent use.

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, and schema description coverage is 100% (empty schema). The description doesn't need to explain parameters, and it correctly implies no inputs are required. Baseline is 4 for zero parameters, as the description aligns with the schema.

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 all stored logs from memory' clearly states the action (clear) and resource (stored logs) with scope (all, from memory). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_console_logs or get_network_logs which retrieve logs rather than clear them. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from hypothetical siblings like 'delete_logs' or 'archive_logs'.

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 doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., after debugging), exclusions (e.g., not for production), or related tools (e.g., use after get_console_logs). The agent must infer usage from the action alone.

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