session_clear

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains what the tool does (sends Ctrl+L to clear screen) and the optional parameter behavior (omit for active session). However, it doesn't mention potential side effects, error conditions, permissions needed, or what happens if the session_id is invalid. The description adds basic context but lacks comprehensive behavioral details.

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?

Perfectly structured with a clear purpose statement followed by parameter documentation. Every sentence earns its place: the first sentence explains what the tool does, the second explains parameter behavior. No wasted words, appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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 this is a simple action tool with one optional parameter and an output schema exists (though not shown), the description is nearly complete. It explains the action, parameter usage, and default behavior. The main gap is lack of information about return values or error conditions, but the output schema should cover that. For a Ctrl+L screen clear operation, this is appropriately 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 0%, so the description must fully compensate. It provides complete parameter semantics: explains what session_id is ('Target session ID'), documents the default behavior ('Omit for the active session'), and clarifies the parameter is optional. This adds significant value beyond the bare schema which only shows the parameter name and type.

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 specific action ('Clear the screen') and the target resource ('an iTerm2 session'), with precise implementation detail ('sends Ctrl+L'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like session_close, session_restart, or session_send by focusing solely on screen clearing without affecting session state or sending arbitrary commands.

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 context for when to use this tool: to clear the terminal screen in iTerm2. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the specificity of the action (Ctrl+L for screen clearing) naturally differentiates it from other session operations like closing, restarting, or sending data.

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