clearActiveCollection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool changes search behavior ('fans back out across all collections'), which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not mention side effects like whether this action is reversible, requires specific permissions, or affects other operations, leaving some gaps in transparency.

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 that front-loads the core action ('clear the active collection') and immediately explains the outcome. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and impact, with no wasted text.

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 simplicity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is largely complete—it explains what the tool does and its effect on transcript searches. However, it could be more complete by mentioning potential side effects or confirming it has no return value, though this is minor for such a straightforward tool.

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%, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately focuses on the tool's effect without redundant parameter details, aligning with the baseline for zero-parameter tools.

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 action ('clear') and the target resource ('active collection'), and explicitly distinguishes it from sibling tools by specifying that this action causes 'transcript search fans back out across all collections'—differentiating it from tools like 'clearActiveCommentCollection' which likely affects comment searches 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 implies when to use this tool—when you want to broaden transcript searches from a specific collection to all collections. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives (e.g., 'setActiveCollection' for narrowing searches), so it lacks full exclusion guidance.

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