cache_list

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 mentions listing entries and filtering by tags but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, side-effect free, or require any permissions. This leaves behavioral traits opaque.

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 concise with two short paragraphs. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose. No redundant or filler language. Docstring format is clean and scannable.

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?

With an output schema present, return value details are not strictly needed. However, the description only mentions 'trust scores' without listing other likely fields (e.g., key, value, timestamp). Given two optional parameters and no annotations, the description is adequate but not thorough.

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?

Input schema properties lack descriptions (0% coverage). The description compensates by explaining 'limit: Max entries to return (default: 20, max: 100)' and 'tags: Filter by tags, comma-separated (e.g. 'weather,temperature')'. This adds range and format constraints beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states 'List available cache entries with trust scores', indicating a specific verb and resource. It briefly explains the purpose 'Browse what other agents have cached', but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like cache_lookup or cache_search.

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 use for browsing cached entries but provides no guidance on when not to use or alternatives. With siblings like cache_lookup and cache_search, explicit differentiation would help an agent choose correctly.

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