peaka_delete_cache

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

The description adds context beyond the destructiveHint annotation by clarifying that the cache is removed entirely but the underlying table is not affected. It does not mention other behavioral traits like authorization or rate limits, but given the tool's nature, this is sufficient.

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 concise with no wasted words. It starts with the core purpose, then adds the key behavior note and usage guidance in a clear, organized manner.

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?

For a simple delete tool with two required parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It covers the action, side effects, parameter sourcing, and prerequisite procedures, meeting all informational needs.

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?

Although the schema covers 100% of the parameters, the description adds value by explaining where to obtain the cacheId (from peaka_get_cache_statuses) and providing a workflow for the projectId, which helps the agent understand the parameters' origins and usage.

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 action (delete), resource (cache in Peaka project), and explicitly says the underlying table is not affected, distinguishing it from sibling tools that delete queries or other resources.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use the tool (when you have cacheId from peaka_get_cache_statuses) and includes a fallback for obtaining the projectId (call peaka_list_projects first), effectively telling the agent how to proceed.

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