clear_queue

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It transparently discloses that the tool clears pending jobs but leaves the current job unaffected. However, it does not mention whether the action is destructive or if any confirmation is required.

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?

Two sentences with no superfluous words. The first sentence immediately states the action and target, making it front-loaded and efficient.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the behavioral scope and key constraint, making it complete for an agent to understand its effect.

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 no parameters, and the description adds value by clarifying the scope ('all pending jobs') and the constraint ('does not affect currently running job'), which goes beyond the empty 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 clearly identifies the verb 'Clear' and the resource 'all pending jobs from the ComfyUI queue'. It differentiates from sibling tools like 'cancel_job' by specifying it clears all pending jobs and does not affect the currently running job.

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 states the tool's purpose and the scope (all pending jobs, not running job). It implies usage for clearing the entire queue, but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like 'cancel_queued_job' for selective cancellation.

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