Clear Agency Cache

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Clear cache' implies a mutating action, but the description does not explain side effects, scope (full-site vs. partial), or whether the action is reversible. This lack of detail leaves the agent uncertain about the operational impact.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the action and target, earning a perfect score for conciseness.

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 parameter and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose but misses critical context: when to use it vs. similar cache tools, what clearing the cache actually does, and any safety considerations. This makes the description insufficient for confident selection.

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 input schema fully documents 'website_uid' as 'Website UID', and the description adds no additional meaning beyond that. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 applies.

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 verb 'Clear' and the resource 'cache for an Agency Plan website', which conveys the specific scope. It distinguishes from generic cache tools by referencing the Agency Plan, but it does not explicitly contrast with the sibling 'hosting_cache_clear', so it falls short of a 5.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternative cache-clearing tools like 'hosting_cache_clear' or 'clear_api_cache'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent without help in selecting the correct tool.

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