rails_lens_refresh_cache

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

Annotations show idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds detail that the tool can invalidate either a specific tool's cache or all caches, which is beyond what annotations provide. No contradictions.

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 a single short sentence in Japanese, front-loaded with the main action and parameter nuance. No wasted words.

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 one optional parameter and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the essential behavior. Could mention return value briefly, but output schema exists.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description bears full burden. It explains the single parameter 'tool_name' well: when omitted, the action targets all caches; when specified, it targets that tool's cache. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states the action (manually invalidate cache) and the resource (cache, optionally scoped to a tool). This distinguishes it from all sibling tools, which are analytical in nature.

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 indicates when to use (to manually invalidate cache) and provides a conditional usage note (if tool_name is omitted, invalidate all caches). It does not discuss alternatives or when not to use, but the context is clear.

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