peaka_update_cache

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

Annotations already indicate idempotent and non-destructive. Description adds critical behavior: the endpoint replaces schedules, not merges, and explains required duration format. No contradiction with 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?

Four sentences front-load purpose, then explain critical behavior, provide examples, and end with usage tip. No redundant or vague language; every sentence earns its place.

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 no output schema, description does not explain return values or side effects. However, for a simple update tool with good annotations and parameter coverage, this is a minor gap. Overall fairly complete.

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%, providing baseline 3. Description adds value by explaining replacement semantics and giving ISO-8601 examples, which aids parameter understanding beyond schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states it updates cache settings on an existing cache. It specifies that schedules are replaced, not merged, and provides ISO-8601 duration examples. Distinguishes from sibling tools like create, delete, and refresh.

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?

Explicitly instructs to supply both schedules with full intended state every call, use ISO-8601 durations, and call peaka_list_projects if projectId is unknown. Does not state when not to use, but context implies it's for existing caches only.

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