cache_clear

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

With no annotations provided, the description adequately discloses the destructive behavior (deleting disposable entries) and the conditional inclusion of persistent artifacts. It does not mention potential side effects or authorization requirements, but for a simple cache-clear operation, the level of transparency is sufficient.

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 extremely concise with only two sentences, front-loading the action and key constraint. Every word serves a purpose, with no redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (single boolean parameter, no output schema), the description covers the core behavior and parameter effect. It does not describe return values or confirmatilon, but these are standard and not critical for selection in this context.

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 0% description coverage, leaving the 'include_persistent' parameter undocumented. The description compensates by explaining that setting it to true includes persistent artifacts, adding meaningful context beyond the schema defaults.

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 clearly states the tool deletes 'disposable cache entries' using the verb 'Delete' and specifies the resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling 'cache_cleanup', which may have overlapping functionality, leaving some ambiguity.

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 provides context on when to use the 'include_persistent' parameter ('Persistent artifacts stay unless include_persistent=true'), but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus related tools like cache_cleanup or cache_stats. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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