cache_stream_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It correctly states that the tool returns null on cache miss and stores data under a prefixed key. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, authorization needs, or rate limits, which are expected for a read operation with no 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?

Two sentences, no fluff. Every part adds meaning: retrieval action, return type, miss behavior, storage pattern. Efficient and 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?

For a simple retrieval tool without output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: what it returns, null condition, key structure. Could optionally mention ordering guarantee or error handling, but not necessary.

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% with parameter descriptions. The description adds value by revealing the actual Redis key format (cachly:stream:{key}), which goes beyond the schema. It does not explain instance_id beyond the schema's UUID hint, but that is sufficient.

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 it retrieves a cached stream as ordered string chunks, returns null on miss, and mentions the key prefix. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like cache_get and cache_stream_set.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like cache_get or cache_mget. The purpose is implicit through context, but a note about preferring this for stream data would improve clarity.

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