eds_purge_cache

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It communicates that the tool purges cache and triggers a fresh fetch, but does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., temporary performance impact) or authentication requirements. The behavior is minimally described.

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, well-formed sentence that starts with the action verb and includes the purpose immediately. No extraneous words or redundant information.

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 (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the core functionality and parameter meaning adequately. It could mention that the purging is immediate or irreversible, but the lack is not severe.

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 100% for the single 'path' parameter, and the tool description mentions 'EDS page path' as context. The baseline 3 is appropriate since the description adds little beyond what the schema already provides (the example '/about').

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 uses a specific verb 'Purge' and clearly identifies the resource as 'CDN cache for an EDS page path'. It is distinct from sibling tools like eds_publish_page or eds_preview_page, which deal with content staging rather than cache invalidation.

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 usage when stale cache is an issue, but does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks prerequisites or exclusions, which would improve guidance.

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