Reload a bundle from disk

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

Beyond annotations (idempotent, non-destructive), the description discloses the caching-per-path behavior, the effect on subsequent calls, and the return value structure ({ cleared: number }). It also states that the action is a cache drop, aligning with readOnlyHint=false while adding context about what actually happens.

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?

Well-structured with a one-sentence summary, followed by rationale, args, returns, and examples. Every section adds value and the description is appropriately concise for the tool's simplicity.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers when to use, what happens (cache drop, next read), the optional parameter meaning, and the return shape. No gaps in context are evident.

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 covers the single parameter bundle_path with 100% coverage and a clear description ('Bundle to drop; omit for all'). The description repeats essentially the same meaning ('bundle to drop; omit to drop every cached bundle') without adding significant new detail, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specific action ('Drop the cached copy of a bundle') and resource (bundle cache), distinguishing it from sibling tools like okf_open_bundle or okf_get_concept. It explains the purpose with a concrete verb and outcome (re-read from disk), not a tautology.

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?

Explicitly says to call after editing files, and provides both 'Use when' and 'Don't use when' examples. This gives clear conditions for use and implicitly names the alternative (do nothing when only reading), which satisfies the requirement for usage guidance.

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