cache_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Report' implies a read-only operation, and the listed metadata adds context, but it does not explicitly state that the tool has no side effects or whether it reads from a local cache. This is a minor gap.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and every word adds value. No redundant phrases or fluff.

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 simple metadata-reporting tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description lists the key return fields, giving sufficient context. It does not describe error conditions or response format, but these are not critical for such a low-complexity tool.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing to explain beyond the schema. Baseline 4 for zero-parameter tools is appropriate.

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 'Report cache metadata' with a specific list of fields (last sync time, commit SHA, counts), making it distinct from sibling tools like list_categories or refresh_cache. The verb 'Report' and resource 'cache metadata' are precise.

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 phrase 'Use to debug sync issues' provides a clear, actionable context for when to invoke this tool. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the guidance is sufficient for a status-reporting tool.

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