cache_clear

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses only scope, not consequences. For an operation that removes data, it never says whether the action is reversible, whether clearing everything also wipes non-Canva state, or whether it disrupts an active session/auth. The prefix scoping is the only behavioral hint.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero padding; the scoping detail is exactly the information an agent needs, expressed compactly.

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 one-parameter, non-required, output-less tool this is nearly sufficient: purpose and the key parameter semantics are covered. The remaining gap is consequence/safety disclosure, which is low-risk here but still absent given the lack of annotations.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate and largely does: it maps '' to 'everything' and 'canva:' to 'only Canva', giving real meaning to the otherwise bare 'prefix' string. It stops short of saying whether arbitrary prefixes are accepted or how partial matching works, so not a full 5.

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 + resource ('Clear cached data') with no ambiguity about what the tool does. No sibling touches cache management, so it is trivially distinguished from the canva_* and desktop_* tools. The parenthetical further pins down the scope of what is being cleared.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent infers you clear cache to force a refresh of stale data. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or dependency/prerequisite guidance (e.g., whether a session must be re-established afterward). Adequate but with clear gaps.

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