flutter_clean

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

The description discloses the core behavior: it deletes build artifacts, which is the main thing an agent needs to know. However, with no annotations provided, it does not mention secondary effects like removing .dart_tool or requiring a subsequent pub get before rebuilding, which would make the behavior more fully transparent.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The action and use case are front-loaded, and every word contributes value.

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 one-parameter tool, the description is largely sufficient: it explains what the tool does, when to use it, and the single required argument is documented in the schema. It could be strengthened by noting the post-clean dependency refresh step, but that is not 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so project_dir is already documented as the path to the Flutter project directory. The description adds no extra parameter details, which is acceptable because the schema covers the only parameter.

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 ('Run flutter clean') with a clear resource ('delete build artifacts'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like flutter_test, flutter_run, or flutter_build. The 'bad state' trigger adds concrete context for the tool's purpose.

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?

It gives a clear use case: 'Useful when builds get into a bad state.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the trigger is specific enough for an agent to decide when cleaning is appropriate.

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