gemini_delete_cache_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose side effects. It only states the action without mentioning that deletion is permanent/irreversible, whether it affects dependent operations, or any permissions required. For a destructive operation, this lacks necessary transparency.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and object. No fluff or redundancy. Perfectly concise for a simple delete operation.

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?

The description is minimal but sufficient for a simple delete with a single parameter and an output schema (though its content is unknown). It lacks any note on use cases, like 'use after cache is no longer needed' or error conditions, but for a straightforward delete it may be adequate.

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 schema already documents the single parameter 'cache_name' with a description. The tool description adds no additional semantic meaning, such as format, expected identifier, or how to obtain it. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline is 3, and no extra value is added.

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?

Clearly states the action (delete) and the target (content cache). The verb 'delete' is specific and unambiguous, and the resource 'content cache' is precise. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create, query, or list caches.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as gemini_create_cache_tool or gemini_list_caches_tool. It simply says 'Delete a content cache' without context like prerequisites (e.g., cache must exist) or typical use cases (e.g., after no longer needed).

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