cache_invalidate

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 only states 'invalidate', which suggests a destructive action, but does not elaborate on whether it is irreversible, the effects on other cache operations, or any authorization requirements. Additional detail is needed.

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, consisting of two sentences. The first sentence states the overall purpose, and the second explains the parameter usage. No extraneous information is included.

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 description is largely complete for a simple tool with an output schema. It covers the key usage scenario and parameter semantics. However, it could explicitly state that cache_key and flush_all are mutually exclusive, though this is implied. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description fully compensates by explaining the meaning and usage of both parameters: cache_key for a single entry and flush_all to clear everything. This adds critical context beyond the bare JSON schema types.

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's purpose: 'Invalidate one or all cache entries.' It specifies the verb 'Invalidate' and the resource 'cache entries', and distinguishes between single entry invalidation and flushing all entries.

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 clear guidance on when to use each parameter: 'Pass cache_key to remove one entry, or flush_all=true to wipe everything.' It implies the appropriate context for each option but does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or compare it to siblings, though the sibling list includes cache_lookup and cache_store.

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