Clears all cached commands to reset the cache and force fresh execution of commands from the server.
Clear all cached commands
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "clear_command_cache"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the action ('clear') but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., does it affect running processes? Is it reversible? Are there permission requirements?). This is insufficient for a destructive operation.
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 sentence, front-loaded with the core action. It is appropriately concise but could be slightly expanded with context without becoming too long.
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 simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks context about what 'cached commands' are, the scope of clearing (e.g., global or per-session), and whether it affects other tools like 'cached_commands' or 'execution_log'.
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?
There are no parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description does not need to add parameter details. It provides the action, which is sufficient for a parameterless tool.
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 'Clear all cached commands' uses a specific verb ('clear') and resource ('cached commands'), clearly indicating the action and scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'cached_commands' (which likely reads or lists cache) and 'get_cache_stats' (which provides statistics).
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?
No guidance on when or when not to use the tool. No mention of prerequisites, side effects, or alternatives. For instance, it might be used after command changes or to free memory, but this is not stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.