clear_bearer_token

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description aligns with those. It adds valuable context beyond the annotations by explaining the consequence: the next API call will fail with an auth error prompting a new token. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 short sentences, no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the behavioral consequence is stated concisely in the second sentence. Every sentence earns its place.

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 single-parameter, side-effect-only tool with strong annotations and a sibling set_bearer_token, the description is sufficient. It explains the action, the scope, and the follow-up consequence. No output schema is needed here because the tool returns no meaningful value.

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 the environment parameter already documented as 'The environment name whose token should be cleared.' The tool description only restates the environment concept without adding new parameter-level detail, so the schema carries the parameter semantics fully.

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 uses a specific verb ('Clear') and a specific resource ('stored bearer token for an AKHQ environment'), and it clarifies the scope is per-environment. This clearly differentiates it from the sibling set_bearer_token, which performs the opposite operation.

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 the tool: when a stored token should be removed so that the next call prompts for a new one. However, it does not explicitly name the alternative (set_bearer_token) or state when not to use this tool, leaving some selection reasoning to the agent.

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