ynab_clear_cache

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that it clears 'in-memory caches' and that 'no YNAB data is modified,' providing concrete behavioral context beyond the 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 three succinct sentences: stating the action, safety and return, and usage context. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff.

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 zero parameters, an output schema (so return format is documented), and annotations covering safety, the description completely covers what the tool does, why it is safe, and when to use it.

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 tool has no parameters, and the description explicitly states 'Args: (none).' With 100% schema coverage (empty schema), the description adds no further parameter meaning but properly communicates the absence of parameters.

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 'Clear all in-memory caches,' using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from all sibling tools, which deal with YNAB data operations like transactions, accounts, budgets, etc.

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 explicitly says 'Use when: you need fresh data after external YNAB changes, or to free memory,' providing clear context for when to invoke this tool. It also notes it is a safe operation with no data modification, contrasting with data-modifying siblings.

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