c_clear_cache

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it explains that clearing the cache forces a reindex on next operation, which is a significant side effect. Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description elaborates on the practical impact, enhancing transparency without contradicting annotations.

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 front-loaded with the core action in the first sentence, followed by a concise explanation of use cases. Every sentence earns its place by adding critical information without redundancy, making it highly efficient and well-structured.

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 the tool's complexity (destructive operation with no parameters) and rich annotations, the description is nearly complete. It explains what the tool does, when to use it, and the behavioral outcome. The lack of an output schema is mitigated by the clear action description, though minor details like error handling or confirmation prompts aren't covered.

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?

With 0 parameters and 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is high. The description doesn't need to explain parameters, but it implicitly confirms there are no required inputs by focusing on the action and consequences, which aligns perfectly with the empty input 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 specific action ('Clears the embeddings cache') and the resource affected ('embeddings cache'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like search or indexing operations. It goes beyond the title by explaining the consequence ('forcing a complete reindex on next search or manual index operation'), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Useful when encountering cache corruption or after major codebase changes.' This provides clear context for application, helping the agent decide when to invoke it versus alternatives like checking status or performing searches without clearing cache.

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