expire

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

Without annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention what happens if the key does not exist, whether it overwrites existing TTLs, or any side effects. The description is minimal and lacks critical behavioral context.

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 extremely concise, using a single sentence for purpose, followed by structured Args and Returns sections. Every sentence provides value, and the most important information is front-loaded. No wasted words.

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 simple tool with two parameters and an output schema (implied), the description covers the basics: purpose, parameters, and return type. However, it lacks details on error conditions or edge cases, which would be useful for a complete understanding. Still, it is largely sufficient.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It adds semantic meaning to both parameters: 'name' is described as 'The Redis key' and 'expire_seconds' as 'Time in seconds after which the key should expire'. This goes beyond the schema's type-only definitions, providing essential context.

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 action ('Set an expiration time') and the resource ('a Redis key'), providing a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'set' or 'delete'. It is unambiguous and directly communicates the tool's purpose.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it, nor does it reference any sibling tools or context. The agent receives no decision-making support beyond the basic function.

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