cache_delete

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

Without annotations, the description fully informs of destructive/irreversible nature, return value (count of actually deleted keys), and that deleting non-existent keys returns 0 without error. Also mentions underlying Redis DEL implementation.

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?

Three concise sentences front-loading key actions and constraints. Every sentence adds value: purpose, behavioral caution, return info, alternatives, and clear instruction to avoid misuse.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description explains return value. Covers input parameters, behavior, edge cases, and relation to sibling tools. No significant gaps given the tool's complexity.

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% so baseline is 3, but the description adds valuable context: instance_id should be obtained via list_instances, and keys field accepts exact keys only (no glob patterns) with suggestion to use cache_keys for listing.

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 verb (delete), resource (cache keys), and scope (one or more from a running instance). It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly noting not to clear entire instance and contrasting with cache_set with TTL.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use (remove stale entries) and when-not-to-use (clearing entire instance), with specific alternatives: cache_set with TTL for auto-expiry, and dashboard/delete_instance for full clearance. Also explains safety of deleting non-existent keys.

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