get_react_query_cache

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. The verbs 'Inspect' and 'Shows' clearly imply a non-mutating read operation, and the content described (queries, status, cached data) sets expectations for the returned information. It does not mention potential side effects, but for a read-only inspection tool this is adequate.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action 'Inspect'. Every word contributes to the tool's purpose, with no redundant or filler content.

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 inspection tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior (what it inspects and what it shows). The filtering capability is documented in the schema, and the description is sufficient for the tool's complexity, though a bit more detail on return structure would be helpful.

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 100% description coverage for both parameters (status and queryKey). The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what is already in the schema, so it meets the baseline expected for high schema coverage.

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 the specific verb 'Inspect' with the precise resource 'React Query/TanStack Query cache', and further clarifies it shows 'queries, their status, and cached data'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling state-inspection tools like get_redux_state or get_zustand_stores.

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 implicitly establishes usage context by naming the specific technology (React Query/TanStack Query), making it clear when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, so it lacks explicit exclusion guidance.

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