clear_cache

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

No annotations provided, so description carries burden. It explains that after clearing, the next call re-fetches and rebuilds cache. But it lacks details on synchronicity, timing, or side effects like impact on other users.

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 a short, well-structured paragraph without wasted words. It conveys purpose and parameter usage efficiently.

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 3 parameters, all described in schema, and no output schema, the description covers main functionality and parameter usage. Could mention error handling or prerequisites, but it's fairly complete for a simple cache-clearing tool.

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 coverage is 100%, baseline 3. Description adds semantic value by explaining scope values with examples and clarifying default behavior, going beyond schema.

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 invalidates cached Hudl data, specifying the verb (invalidate/clear) and resource (cache). It distinguishes from sibling tools that are all read-only data retrieval operations.

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 explicit guidance on using different scope values, defaults, and the 'list' parameter. However, it does not include when-not-to-use or direct comparison with alternatives, though sibling tools are clearly read-only.

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