Clear the current selection to prevent stale objects from being included in exports or operations that rely on the selected set.
Clear the selection.
Worth doing before export or a tool that falls back to "the selection", so a stale selection cannot pull in objects you did not mean to touch.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly discloses the operation and its intended effect on subsequent tools. It stops short of stating whether the action is undoable or whether it affects only the selection state, but 'clear the selection' is a minimal, non-destructive operation and the rationale adds useful behavioral 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 two short sentences with no filler. The operation is front-loaded and the second sentence' usage rationale earns its place by explaining why the tool matters.
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 zero-parameter, no-output action, the description fully covers what the tool does and when to call it. There is no missing information required for correct invocation.
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 properties, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The baseline of 4 for no-parameter tools applies here.
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 states a single precise operation, 'Clear the selection', which is a specific verb+resource and clearly distinct from sibling tools like select_objects or get_selected_objects. It also reinforces scope by explaining that a stale selection must not pull in unintended objects.
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 gives an explicit invocation context: use it before export or before any tool that falls back to 'the selection', with the reason being to avoid stale selections affecting output. It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but for a zero-parameter utility there is no real alternative to route between.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.