Toggle Edge Cache

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

Annotations only include openWorldHint: true, which signals potential side effects beyond the immediate toggle. The description does not disclose any behavioral consequences such as propagation delays, impact on existing cached content, or whether the change is immediate or reversible. With minimal annotation coverage, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure and fails to provide it.

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 front-loads the core action. There is zero wasted wording, and it is immediately scannable. It achieves maximum efficiency for a simple toggle 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?

For a tool with openWorldHint and no output schema, the description should explain side effects, return values, or any asynchronous behavior. None are mentioned. The tool is simple in terms of parameters, but the missing behavioral context and lack of return description make it incomplete for an agent to know what to expect after invocation.

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 100%, so both env_id and enabled are already documented with clear meanings. The description adds no extra semantic value beyond restating the action; it does not elaborate on the format of env_id or any implications of the boolean. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema fully covers the parameters, and the description offers no additional insight.

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 'Enable or disable edge caching for an environment' uses a specific verb (toggle) and clearly identifies the resource (edge caching) and scope (environment). It is unambiguous and distinguishable from sibling tools like kinsta_edge-cache_clear or kinsta_tools_clear-cache, which perform different actions. However, it does not explicitly contrast with these siblings, so it does not achieve a perfect 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as kinsta_edge-cache_clear or kinsta_tools_clear-cache. There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions. The only context is that it applies to an environment, which is already implied by the required env_id parameter. This leaves the agent to infer usage from the name and siblings.

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