api_clear_errors

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool clears the error list, but does not mention whether the action is irreversible, whether permissions are required, whether it affects the current session or all recorded errors, or what it returns. This is a significant gap for a mutating operation.

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 one short, direct sentence with no filler. It is immediately readable and front-loaded with the verb.

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 no-parameter tool, the description is mostly sufficient, but it omits any detail about the return value or side effects. Since there is no output schema, the agent would not know what to expect after the call. It also lacks usage context, though that is covered in a separate dimension. Overall, it is adequate but with clear gaps.

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 has zero parameters, so the description adds all necessary parameter semantics by explaining the tool's purpose. With no input schema properties to document, a baseline of 4 is appropriate.

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 specific verb ('clear') and a specific resource ('recorded API error list'). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like browser_clear_errors by explicitly scoping to API errors, and from api_errors which presumably reads errors.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool or when to avoid it. It does not mention alternatives like api_errors or conditions for clearing. The description only states the action without any context for decision-making.

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