openclaw_sessions_delete

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

Given no annotations, the description discloses that the operation is destructive and wraps `sessions.delete`. This is basic transparency but lacks details on permissions, side effects, or whether the action is reversible. It adds some value beyond the schema.

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 extremely concise: one sentence plus a warning. Every word is meaningful, and the action is front-loaded. No unnecessary details.

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?

While the tool is simple, the description does not mention return values or confirm the result of deletion. No output schema exists, so the description should at least hint at what the agent can expect. It is adequate but not fully complete.

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 both `id` and `instance` having detailed descriptions. The tool description adds no new parameter meaning; it only states the overall action. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Delete a session permanently' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling session tools like list, create, patch, abort, etc., by focusing on deletion. The note about being destructive reinforces the purpose.

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 tool warns 'Destructive — confirm before calling,' which is an explicit usage guideline. However, it does not compare with alternatives like `openclaw_sessions_abort` or `openclaw_sessions_reset`, so it's slightly less comprehensive than ideal.

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