auth_clear

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

没有提供注解，描述承担全部行为披露责任。'from memory' 提供了有价值的细节：清除的是本地内存状态而非服务端会话，这比泛泛的 'delete session' 更具体。但未说明清除后的后果（如是否需要重新认证）或返回行为。

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?

单句描述，信息密度高，无冗余词汇，结构和措辞均已最简化。

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?

工具本身极其简单（0 参数、无嵌套对象、有输出 schema），单句描述已覆盖核心行为。缺少与 auth_* 工具族其他成员的关系说明，但对这样一个无参数工具而言，描述已足够完整。

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?

工具无参数，input schema 为空对象，schema description coverage 为 100%，描述无需补充任何参数语义。根据 0 参数 baseline 4 分。

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?

描述使用明确动词 'Clear' 和资源 'active session'，并注明作用范围 'from memory'，能清楚表达工具的功能。虽然未与兄弟工具显式对比，但足以和 auth_status、auth_refresh 等区分。

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?

描述隐含了使用场景——当需要清除当前认证会话时调用此工具，但没有说明何时不该使用，也未与 auth_finish、auth_refresh 等替代工具做任何区分。代理只能从工具名和单一描述句推断。

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