browser_events_clear

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states the action (clear and create checkpoint) but does not disclose side effects, such as whether events are permanently deleted, whether ongoing instrumentation is affected, or if the checkpoint overwrites previous ones. This is insufficient for a destructive tool.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently communicates the core action.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic intent. However, as a destructive tool, it lacks important context such as irreversibility, effect on future captures, and definition of 'checkpoint'. More detail would improve completeness.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description need not add parameter meaning. Baseline is 4 for 0 parameters; the description is clear and requires no further parameter explanation.

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's function: clearing runtime events captured by browser_instrument and creating a new checkpoint. The verb '清空' (clear) and resource 'runtime events' are specific, and the action distinguishes it from siblings like browser_events (read) and browser_instrument (start capture).

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 after browser_instrument capture to reset state, but provides no explicit when/when-not guidance or mention of alternatives. An agent would infer usage context but lacks clear decision support.

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