cache_fill_day

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses only that this writes into a cache from the opendata API and that max_decisions caps results, but says nothing about permissions, rate limits, overwrite/idempotency behavior, or what happens on partial failures.

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 tightly packed into one sentence with the core action front-loaded, followed by the optional court filter and the max_decisions constraint. Every clause earns its place with no filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. However, for a cache-writing tool with no annotations and zero schema descriptions on five parameters, the description is only minimally complete: it covers the basic action and two parameter constraints but omits safety, idempotency, and error behavior.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It usefully clarifies that court accepts a code or name and that max_decisions is a cap with default 100 and max 500, but year, month, and day receive no semantic detail beyond their names, leaving three required parameters under-specified.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Stáhne do cache všechna rozhodnutí') and scopes it to decisions published on a given day via the official opendata API. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling cache_fill, which likely has broader or different scope, so it falls short of a 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?

Usage is implied: populate the cache for one day, optionally filtered by court. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use conditions, and no alternatives named (e.g., cache_fill or browse_published), leaving the agent to infer context.

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