clickup_field_unset

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates this is a mutation operation ('clear', 'sets it back'), specifies what gets modified ('custom field value'), and describes the return value ('Returns an empty object on success'). It doesn't mention permissions, rate limits, or error conditions, but covers core behavior adequately.

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?

Three focused sentences with zero waste: first states purpose and effect, second clarifies field definition persistence, third provides alternative and return value. Every sentence adds essential information.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides good coverage: purpose, effect, sibling differentiation, and return value. It doesn't address error cases or permissions, but given the clear scope and 100% parameter documentation, it's reasonably complete.

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%, with both parameters well-documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 specific action ('clear a custom field value'), target resource ('on a ClickUp task'), and effect ('sets it back to empty/unset'). It explicitly distinguishes from sibling clickup_field_set by stating 'Use clickup_field_set to assign a new value instead.'

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool ('clear a custom field value') versus the alternative ('Use clickup_field_set to assign a new value instead'). It also clarifies the relationship with field definition ('The field definition on the list remains intact').

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