clear_selection

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

The annotations already indicate that this is not read-only, is idempotent, and is not destructive. The description provides no additional behavioral detail beyond naming the action. Since the operation is simple and self-evident, this is adequate, but it does not go beyond what annotations already convey.

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, complete sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action and the target resource, making it immediately scannable and understandable.

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 zero-parameter, trivial state-changing tool, the description plus annotations are sufficient. There is no output schema, but for such a simple operation the behavior is fully conveyed. No hidden inputs, side effects, or prerequisites need explanation.

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 zero parameters and the schema is empty with 100% coverage, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on the action rather than inventing parameter details.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Clear the editor's current selection.' This unambiguously identifies the operation and distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_selection and get_selection. Even though the title is similar, the description clarifies the exact scope.

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 implies the tool is for clearing the current selection, and the sibling list includes selection-related tools such as set_selection and get_selection. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer clear_selection over alternatives like set_selection with an empty value, nor does it mention any exclusions. Usage context is implied rather than explicit.

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