pubmed_manage_cache

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

The annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, and the description adds meaningful nuance by specifying that 'clean' removes expired entries while 'clear' wipes a cache layer, and 'stats' is a read-only operation. This helps the agent understand the varying destructiveness of each action beyond the single annotation flag.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core purpose, and uses a clean pattern of action-to-purpose mapping. Every sentence contributes necessary operational guidance with no filler or redundancy.

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 two-parameter tool with enum-restricted values and a clear maintenance scope, the description covers the available actions, their effects, and the target layer concept. There is no output schema, but the described behavior is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 already provides full documentation for both parameters with enum values and descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description enriches the 'action' parameter by explaining the real-world intent of each value, but it does not add material meaning for 'target' beyond what the schema states.

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 identifies a cache-management tool with specific operations: viewing statistics, cleaning expired entries, and clearing cache layers. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling PubMed search tools, which perform content queries rather than cache maintenance.

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 gives explicit guidance on which action value to use for each intended outcome: stats for hit rates/storage, clean for expired entries, clear for wiping a layer. There is no explicit 'when not to use' statement, but the distinction from sibling tools is evident and the action-level guidance is clear.

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