cache_status

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds genuinely useful context: the state reported is local and is split per dataset, which tells the agent this is an inspection of on-disk state rather than a remote listing. It does not say whether the status is a cached snapshot or freshly verified, nor whether a stale cache still counts as downloaded, which matters given openWorldHint=true.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler, and the key qualifiers ('already downloaded and parsed', 'per dataset') come immediately. It is efficient but borders on telegraphic, reading more like a table caption than a usable instruction.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not explain the returned shape, and with no parameters there is nothing else to specify. What remains missing is the operational relationship to refresh_cache and load_dataset, which an agent needs to sequence calls correctly.

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 takes zero parameters, so the schema is complete by definition and the description cannot add parameter meaning. The phrase 'per dataset' usefully signals that the dataset key is the unit of the returned grouping even though no argument is supplied.

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 sentence names the resource (the local cache) and the scope it reports on (already downloaded and parsed data, broken down per dataset), so an agent knows this is a status/inspection read rather than a fetch. It is not a clean verb+resource phrasing and never names the closely related siblings list_datasets, describe_dataset, or refresh_cache, so differentiation is left to inference.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no reference to alternatives. An agent has to guess that cache_status should be consulted before load_dataset or run_query, and that refresh_cache is the tool that changes the state this one reports, rather than being told.

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