web.cache

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it never says that 'clear' is a destructive, irreversible mutation, whether it affects all namespaces or one, whether it requires elevated permissions, or whether concurrent requests are impacted. Naming the cache domains is the only extra context, and the description doesn't explain whether the tool operates on all of them or one at a time.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler, and the resource is front-loaded. It is terse to the point of under-specification, but nothing is redundant or padded.

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 one-parameter tool this is close to adequate, but with no annotations and no output schema the description should at minimum state that one mode destroys data and what each mode returns. The mention of three cache domains without explaining their relationship to the single action parameter leaves a real gap.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate; it partially does by mapping 'stats' to state inspection and 'clear' to clearing, and by naming cache domains. But the enum values themselves are never explained, no default for the optional action is stated, and the listed domains (resolve/content/feeds) have no corresponding parameter in the schema, creating ambiguity about whether they are selectable at all.

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 states the resource (cache) and names the two modes (state vs. clearing) plus the cache domains (resolve/content/feeds), which does separate it from siblings like web.stats or web.feeds. However, it is a noun phrase rather than a clear verb+resource statement, and the Polish wording leaves an agent to infer which mode the tool actually performs on a given call.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus web.stats (which plausibly returns metrics) or web.configure. Nor does it state when inspection ('stats') is appropriate versus when invalidation ('clear') is warranted, leaving the choice entirely to the schema enum.

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