configure_cache

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action without revealing side effects, whether the operation is immediate, persistent, requires special permissions, or affects existing cache entries. For a configuration tool, this is a significant gap.

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, concise sentence that quickly conveys the tool's purpose. It contains no redundant information and is appropriately sizeable for the tool's simplicity.

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 that the tool has only two parameters with full schema descriptions and an output schema exists, the description is mostly adequate. However, the lack of annotations and behavioral details (e.g., effects of setting TTL to 0, whether changes persist, or authorization requirements) leaves some gaps for a configuration operation. The simplicity of the tool prevents a lower score, but it could be more complete.

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 schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (ttl and directory), so the baseline is 3. The description itself does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, but it does not need to since the schema is thorough.

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 'Configure TTL (Time To Live) for a specific directory cache' uses a specific verb ('configure') and a clear resource (TTL for a directory cache). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_cache_status and sync_directory by focusing specifically on TTL configuration.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative approaches. The usage context is only implied by the tool name and description, but no explicit direction is given.

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