clear_cache

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly warns that side effects cannot be undone and explains the remove_disk_file parameter's impact on disk files. However, it does not mention other potential side effects or return behavior, so it is not 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?

The description is a single compact sentence (two clauses) that conveys core purpose, a parameter condition, and an important side effect. Every word earns its place, with no redundant or fluff content.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, yet the description covers the main action and key side effects. However, it omits details about required parameters (ctx, node_path), potential return values, and any preconditions. For a mutation tool of moderate complexity, this leaves gaps for an agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the remove_disk_file parameter's effect, but the required parameters ctx and node_path are not described at all. This is a significant gap for a tool with no parameter documentation in 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?

The description clearly states the tool 'clears runtime cache' with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like manage_cache and list_caches by noting the optional disk file deletion behavior, making it unmistakable what this tool does.

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 the tool is for clearing caches, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like manage_cache or list_caches. There are no exclusions or alternative tool references, so guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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