UltraSearch MCP

clear_cache

Purge stored search, fetch, or crawl results to prevent stale data. Use when researching fast-moving topics that need current information.

Instructions

Purge the search and/or fetch result cache. Useful when researching fast-moving topics where cached results from the past hour may be stale.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "clear_cache"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`target`	No	Which cache to clear: search results, fetched pages, crawl manifests, or all (default all)	all

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Sep 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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. 'Purge' clearly signals a destructive operation, which is critical, but it does not mention whether the purge is irreversible, global versus per-user, or whether it affects in-flight requests. This is a minimum viable disclosure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two tight sentences: the first states the action and resource, the second gives the practical use case. There is no repetition of schema details, no padding, and the most salient information is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tool with one optional, well-documented parameter and no output schema, the description and schema together provide enough to call it correctly. The main gap is the unmentioned crawl cache and lack of side-effect details, but these are minor given the tool's simplicity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the 'target' parameter is fully documented with an enum, a default value, and a clear explanation. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies a specific action (purge) and resource (search/fetch result cache), making it easy to distinguish from the search/fetch sibling tools. However, it omits the 'crawl' cache in the prose, slightly narrowing the stated scope relative to the schema's target enum.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives an explicit, practical trigger: use when researching fast-moving topics where cached results from the past hour may be stale. It does not discuss when not to use it or alternatives, but this is a maintenance tool with no real substitute, so the situational guidance is enough.

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

Deploy Server