clear_auth_data

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that both OAuth token file and app cache are cleared, providing clear effects. It could mention if side effects like forced logout occur, but the listed behaviors are sufficient for understanding the action.

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 plus a numbered list. Every sentence adds value: purpose, use cases, and what is cleared. No redundancy or fluff.

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 simple clearing tool with two optional boolean parameters, the description covers purpose, when to use, and effects. It does not explain default behavior when both parameters are omitted, but the statement 'This will clear both' implies default clearing of both, which is accurate. Lacks description of return values, but no output schema exists.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds context by stating 'both OAuth token file and app cache' are cleared, which maps to the two parameters, but does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions.

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 tool clears 'all cached authentication data and app selection', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like start_oauth_authorization and check_environment by focusing on clearing, not authentication flows.

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 explicitly lists three use cases (MAC token expired, switch accounts, reset authentication) with a numbered list, giving clear when-to-use guidance. It does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternative tools, but the listed use cases imply appropriate contexts.

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