cache_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. "Makes no network call" reinforces the local-only behavior and usefully implies no latency or rate-limit cost, but it largely restates openWorldHint rather than adding new behavioral detail such as cost, side effects, or output shape. A mild addition over the annotation baseline.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the substantive content (what is reported) front-loaded and the behavioral caveat placed last. Nothing could be cut without losing information.

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 zero-parameter, read-only diagnostic with no output schema, the description supplies enough to call it correctly and even sketches the categories of information returned. It stops short of describing the actual return shape, which matters somewhat since no output schema exists, but the enumeration of contents covers most of that gap.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies no input is needed.

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?

"Report this session's requests, the pacing, cache use, and whether images are on" gives a concrete verb plus an enumerated list of the resources reported, which is far more specific than the name alone. It is clear this is a session-local diagnostics read, distinct from the matricula_* search tools, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: the enumerated contents suggest calling it to inspect session behavior, and "Makes no network call" implies it is cheap and safe to call at any time. There is no explicit when-to-use trigger, no when-not-to-use, and no named alternative for obtaining similar information.

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