ReSharper Reset Cache

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes further by quantifying the cost ('costs the next call a full cold analysis') and disclosing a non-obvious lifecycle behavior ('a deleted checkout's cache outlives it'), neither of which is derivable from the annotations or schema.

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?

Four sentences with no filler; the core purpose and the wrong-condition warning are front-loaded, and each sentence contributes a distinct fact. It is slightly dense and could be split for skimming, but nothing is redundant.

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 single-parameter cache-reset tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, trigger condition, prerequisite, cost, and the edge case of a stale deleted checkout. An agent has everything needed to decide to call it and to supply the parameter 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and already explains that solutionPath overrides JB_SOLUTION_PATH and working-directory discovery, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real meaning beyond the schema by explaining the reclaim use case ('pass its old solution path as solutionPath') for a checkout that no longer exists, raising it above baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete this solution's ReSharper analysis cache') plus the consequence (next inspect or cleanup rebuilds from cold), which immediately separates it from the sibling inspect/cleanup tools. An agent can identify exactly what this operates on without inferring from the name.

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?

Gives the precise diagnostic condition for use ('inspect reporting compilation errors a successful build does not'), an explicit prerequisite and anti-case ('Build first, because on a checkout that was never built... the errors are real'), and a general exclusion ('not routine maintenance'). That is when-to-use, when-not-to-use, and a prerequisite all in one paragraph.

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