Clear Samsung Health Incremental Import Cache

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds context: it clears the cache at a specific path, forces full re-parse, and describes auto-invalidation. 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?

Three sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with the action and file path, then explains why and when to use it.

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 tool with no output schema and one trivial parameter, the description fully covers purpose, behavior, usage, and cleanup conditions.

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?

Only one parameter (response_format) with 0% schema coverage in description. The parameter is trivial and self-explanatory, but the description adds no information beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool clears a specific cache file and explains the cache's purpose (tracking parsed timestamps). It is specific about the resource and action, but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like samsung_health_reimport.

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 a use case ('force a full re-parse without changing the export file') and mentions auto-invalidation condition. However, does not specify when not to use this tool or compare to alternatives like reimport.

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