server_clear_cache

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. 'Clear server caches' does not indicate whether this is a destructive or irreversible operation, what specifically is cleared, whether it affects other users or global state, or any side effects. For a mutation tool, this is a serious transparency gap.

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 extremely short and front-loaded, which is appropriate for a simple tool, but it is under-specified to the point of being almost a tautology of the tool name. It is concise but does not provide enough substantive information to earn a higher score.

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?

Despite the tool's simplicity, the description only restates the name without explaining the cache scope, the effect of clearing, or the intended use case. Given that there are no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter context, the description is incomplete for a tool that performs a side-effecting operation.

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 has zero parameters and the input schema is empty with 100% coverage. There are no parameters to document, so the description's lack of parameter-specific information does not hinder usage. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and there is no reason to deviate.

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 uses a specific verb 'clear' and a specific resource 'server caches', which clearly states the tool's function and distinguishes it from sibling server tools like server_health or server_info. However, it lacks any additional detail about the scope or intended use, making it slightly generic and barely more informative than the tool name.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool or what alternatives exist. The description does not mention prerequisites, side effects, or context, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name and its own understanding of caching.

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