get_cache_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states what information will be displayed (TTL, last updated, record count), and the verb 'show' implies a read-only operation with no side effects. However, it does not explicitly state whether the status is actively refreshed or merely reads cached metadata.

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 that conveys all essential information and wastes no words. It is appropriately concise for a simple status tool.

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 the tool's simplicity, one optional parameter, full schema coverage, and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete enough. It captures the purpose and key details without needing to explain return values or edge cases.

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 fully describes the single parameter (output_format) with format details for 'text' and 'json'. The description adds no extra meaning beyond confirming the tool displays status, which is already implied. Baseline 3 is appropriate since schema coverage is 100%.

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 tool's function: showing cache status for directories, specifically TTL, last updated, and record count. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like sync_directory or configure_cache by being purely informational.

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 implies usage for checking cache status but does not explicitly mention when to use it over alternatives or mention exclusions. No when/when-not guidance is provided, though the read-only nature is apparent.

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