clear

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses the destructive nature of completely emptying the database and graph, and notes a required follow-up action (index(full=True)). It does not warn about irreversibility or permissions, but the language strongly implies total removal, making the behavior transparent enough.

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 concise: three sentences that front-load the main action, then add use case, follow-up, and return value. Every sentence earns its place with no fluff or repetition.

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 destructive tool with no parameters and an output schema, the description is complete. It states what the tool does, why/when to use it, the required post-action, and what it returns. No key information is missing.

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?

The tool takes no parameters (schema is empty), so the baseline for parameter semantics is 4. The description adds no param info but doesn't need to, as there are none to explain.

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 empties the entire ChromaDB base and graph ('Vide completement la base ChromaDB et le graphe'), giving a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'delete' by emphasizing complete clearing, and the purpose is unambiguous.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Utile pour nettoyer les documents orphelins ou repartir de zero' (useful for cleaning orphaned documents or starting from scratch). It also instructs to call index(full=True) afterwards. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like 'delete' for targeted removal, so it's not a perfect 5.

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