hey_cache_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and the description confirms 'Read-only with no side effects'. It adds value by clarifying that the data is local cache state (not live server state), which affects staleness interpretation. It stops short of describing freshness guarantees or how the storage estimate is derived.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: what it returns, its safety profile, and how/when to use it, with the most decision-relevant guidance front-loaded after the payload description.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must convey what comes back, and it does (message counts, cache age, storage estimate). The optional parameter is explained and the pre-flight use case is fully covered.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema does not: it specifies that folder scopes 'message/unread counts' specifically, telling the agent which outputs are affected. The schema-handled caveats about untracked folders complement this.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Get local cache statistics') and enumerates the returned content: message counts, cache age, storage estimate. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling list tools by framing its role as a pre-flight check for force_refresh.

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?

Explicitly states when to use it: 'Use before deciding whether to pass force_refresh on other list tools.' This routes the agent to the right decision point rather than leaving usage implied.

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