pdf_cache_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. However, it includes a generic security warning about untrusted PDF content (text, OCR, etc.) that does not apply to this tool's output of cache statistics. This is misleading. The description also does not disclose that the tool is read-only or has no side effects, which is important for a diagnostic tool.

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 includes a lengthy security warning that is irrelevant to this tool's actual output, making it less concise. The relevant diagnostic purpose is stated succinctly, but the extraneous warning reduces clarity and 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?

Given zero parameters and an existing output schema, the description covers the tool's purpose and usage guidance. However, the misleading security warning and lack of explicit read-only disclosure leave gaps. The behavioral note about not forwarding paths is helpful, but overall completeness is moderate.

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 tool has no parameters, so the input schema is empty and fully covered. The description does not need to add parameter information and appropriately focuses on what the tool returns.

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 returns 'cache diagnostics: file counts, sizes, and the local cache directories.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pdf_cache_clear (which clears cache) by specifying it is for inspecting cache state, not modifying it.

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 indicates the tool is 'Intended for debugging the local install' and advises that directory paths 'should not be forwarded to remote agents.' This provides clear context on when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it beyond the forwarding warning.

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