common-get-cache

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

readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, so the description earns credit for adding real behavior: exact literal matching versus wildcard matching, and the square-bracket gotcha in cache names that would otherwise cause silent mismatches. It never states auth or rate-limit behavior, so it is not a 5.

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?

Three sentences, all load-bearing: purpose and return fields first, then the default behavior, then the matching rules. Zero filler, front-loaded, no repetition of the schema.

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 2-param, no-required, read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers what is returned (size and occupancy), the default scope, and the tricky matching semantics. It leaves the 'full' projection caveat entirely to the schema, which is acceptable but a minor gap given the schema already flags it as diagnostics-only.

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 coverage is 100% (baseline 3), and the description adds meaning beyond the schema by warning that names contain square brackets and are matched literally when passed verbatim, versus '*'/'?' for patterns. This disambiguates the most error-prone parameter for the agent.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Gets information about Sitecore caches') plus what the payload contains ('size and occupancy'). No sibling tool targets caches, so there is no ambiguity to resolve against the ~90 item/security siblings.

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?

'Omit name to return every cache' gives a clear conditional for the default/no-arg case, and the wildcard guidance tells the agent how to widen a query. It stops short of explicit when-not/alternative routing, but no real alternative exists among siblings.

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