clear_cache

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. While it indicates this is a destructive operation ('Clear all cached data'), it doesn't specify what types of data are affected, whether the operation is reversible, what permissions are required, or what happens after execution. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the basic action.

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 perfectly concise with two brief sentences that each serve a clear purpose: the first states the core action, the second provides usage context. There's zero wasted language, and the most important information ('Clear all cached data') is front-loaded for immediate comprehension.

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 destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what 'cached data' encompasses, what systems or components are affected, whether there are side effects, what confirmation or response to expect, or any limitations or risks. The agent lacks crucial information to use this tool safely and effectively.

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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 4. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters since none exist, and the schema already fully documents the empty parameter structure. No additional parameter information is needed or provided.

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 action ('Clear all cached data') and resource ('cached data'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_cache_stats' by focusing on deletion rather than retrieval. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other potential cache-related tools beyond the sibling list provided.

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 implied usage guidance with 'Useful for debugging or forcing fresh data', suggesting when this tool might be appropriate. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or mention specific alternatives among the sibling tools, leaving some ambiguity about optimal usage scenarios.

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