cacheout_clear_cache

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds significant context: directories are preserved, only contents deleted, caches regenerate automatically, and dry_run behavior is detailed. No contradiction with annotations.

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 well-structured: a one-line summary, bulleted details, and a clear example of the return format. Every sentence adds value, and the most critical information (preview with scan_caches) is front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's destructive nature (annotations), the description fully covers what happens, the recommended workflow, and the return value format via the output schema example. No gaps remain for an agent to misinterpret.

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 properties (categories and dry_run) have detailed descriptions, so schema coverage is effectively 100% despite the 0% note. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond those schema descriptions. Baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Clear specific cache categories to free disk space'), identifies the resource (cache categories), and distinguishes from siblings like cacheout_scan_caches by advising to use that tool first. The verb and outcome are specific and unambiguous.

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 explicit usage guidance: run cacheout_scan_caches first to see sizes, then pass slugs, and use dry_run=true to preview. It does not compare directly with smart_clean, but the workflow is clear and actionable.

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