clear_cache

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely says 'clear cache' without revealing whether this is destructive, permanent, or reversible, what happens to the node's cached data, or any side effects. For a mutating operation, this is a significant 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the core action. While it is sparse, it earns its place and is appropriately sized for a simple tool, though additional details could be added without harming conciseness.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and a simple but mutating operation, the description is incomplete. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., node must exist), failure modes, return values, or whether the cache is cleared from disk or memory. The tool's behavior is underspecified for an agent to use it confidently.

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 a single 'path' parameter with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description only implies that the path refers to a file cache node but does not explain what the path should represent (e.g., node path format, required node type). This does not compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 action: clearing cache on a file cache node. It uses a specific verb (clear) and resource (file cache node), and it is distinct from sibling tools like list_caches, get_cache_status, and write_cache, which focus on listing, checking, or writing cache. The purpose is unambiguous.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it does, with no mention of contexts (e.g., after modifying cache parameters) or exclusions (e.g., when you need to preserve cached data). It does not distinguish when to prefer clear_cache over other cache-related tools.

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