cache_clear

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden and does well: it explains that expired-mode is safe, that clearing live entries means paying for requests again, and that price bars never expire by design. It does not mention authorization or rate-limit implications, but it covers the core behavioral consequences for a cache-clearing tool.

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 compact and front-loaded, with the core purpose in the first sentence. Every subsequent sentence adds needed behavioral context about safety, cost, and the immutability of historical price bars, with no filler or repetition.

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 tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description covers the main usage context well: when to use it, what the safe default is, and the cost tradeoff of clearing live entries. The main missing piece is a fuller explanation of the backend enum values, but overall the description is sufficiently complete for a tool of this complexity.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate for the single 'backend' parameter. It usefully explains what 'expired' does and that clearing live entries is costly, but it does not clarify what the 'all', 'fmp', and 'qualtrim' values specifically target. This leaves a meaningful gap in understanding the full parameter semantics.

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 opening sentence 'Drop cached responses' states the exact verb and resource, making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It also distinguishes cache_clear from its data-retrieval and status sibling tools, none of which manage cached data.

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 explicitly says to use this when data looks stale despite its TTL, giving a clear trigger condition. It also provides important usage nuance: the 'expired' default is safe, while clearing live entries has a cost implication. The note about price bars never expiring further guides appropriate usage.

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