elenchus_get_cache_stats

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

No annotations provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. The verb 'get' implies read-only, but it does not explicitly state that the tool is non-destructive or safe. No side effects or costs are mentioned, which is acceptable for a simple stats retrieval but could be more explicit.

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?

Single sentence, no redundancy, and effectively conveys the tool's purpose. However, it lacks any structured formatting (e.g., bullet points) that could aid scanning.

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 simple nature of the tool (one optional parameter, no output schema), the description adequately explains what the tool does and what statistics are returned. It does not specify the return format (e.g., JSON object), but the listed metrics provide sufficient context.

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?

Input schema has one optional parameter (workingDir) with a description, giving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond the schema's existing documentation, aligning with the baseline of 3.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves cache statistics and lists specific metrics (hit rate, total entries, token savings). The name and purpose differentiate from sibling tools like elenchus_clear_cache, but no explicit contrast is made with other get_* tools.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as elenchus_get_optimization_stats or elenchus_clear_cache. The agent receives no context about appropriate use cases or prerequisites.

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