debug_hygiene_preflight

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true, so the destructive nature is known. The description adds that it clears 'stale debugger state' and reports a 'hygiene result', but does not detail what state is affected or what the hygiene result contains, offering only marginal added context.

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 a single sentence that conveys the core action and result without extraneous words, achieving maximum conciseness.

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?

Given the tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and is destructive, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain what constitutes 'stale debugger state', what the hygiene result looks like, or how it differs from related tools like clear_breakpoints, making it incomplete for reliable agent selection.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain parameter roles, but it only mentions the overall action. It does not describe how the boolean parameters (clear_breakpoints, clear_trace_log, clear_exception_filters) or the optional file parameter influence behavior, leaving the agent to infer from names alone.

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 resource ('stale debugger state') and mentions the output ('compact hygiene result'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like clear_breakpoints or clear_trace_log.

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 usage for cleaning up debugger state before debugging, but does not explicitly mention when to use this preflight tool versus individual clear tools like clear_breakpoints or clear_trace_log, nor does it specify prerequisites or alternatives.

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