openclaw_device_repair

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries full burden. It clearly states destructive behavior, lists what gets wiped (broken device, cached tokens, keychain entries), and mentions backup creation. However, it does not mention restoration process or authorization requirements.

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 detailed but every sentence adds necessary context. It is front-loaded with the error condition. Could be slightly more concise, but still 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?

The description covers purpose, usage condition, exact actions, parameter semantics, and side effects. Given the complexity and no output schema, it provides comprehensive context for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds significant value by noting that the instance arg is 'currently no-op' and that the local Store is shared across instances. This goes beyond the schema's description.

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 explicitly states the tool recovers from a specific failure mode ('expected Uint8Array of length 32, got length=0'). It details the actions (backup, wipe, keep configs) and the subsequent regeneration. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like openclaw_device_status, which only reports status.

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 provides clear guidance: 'run only when openclaw_device_status reports the empty-private-key failure mode.' It also notes that the instance argument is currently no-op, preventing misuse in multi-instance contexts.

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