clear_cache

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

The description discloses the core behavioral trait (discards cached data, forces refresh from live source). However, it does not specify scope (e.g., global or per-user), idempotency, or potential performance impact. With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it leaves some ambiguity.

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 that conveys the essential information without any fluff. Every word adds value, and it is appropriately sized for a simple tool with no parameters.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It explains the core action. However, it could benefit from noting scope (e.g., 'global cache') or any side effects, but given simplicity, it is mostly adequate.

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 baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information since there are none, but it correctly describes the tool's action. Schema coverage is 100%, so no compensation needed.

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 purpose: to force refresh data by discarding cached data. It uses a specific verb ('clear' inferred from name) and resource ('cache'). The sibling tools are all data retrieval tools (get, search), so this tool is clearly distinguished as a cache invalidation operation.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, given the sibling tools are all read-only, the usage context is generally implied: use when you need to ensure the latest data from the live source. No exclusions or conditions are mentioned.

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