Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
TokenSaver MCP

TokenSaver MCP

by pozii
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

cache_invalidate

Remove stale cache entries to free memory and ensure fresh data is served after file changes.

Instructions

Remove a stale cache entry (e.g. after file changes).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "key": "<key>"
    },
    "name": "cache_invalidate"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYesCache key to remove.
namespaceNoMust match the namespace used in cache_store.default

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states 'remove' without disclosing side effects (e.g., error handling if key missing, permissions needed, or whether operation is idempotent).

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence that is front-loaded with verb and resource, followed by a helpful example. No wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple invalidation tool with 2 parameters and an output schema, the description is largely sufficient. Missing details like behavior on missing keys, but overall adequate.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The tool description adds no further semantics beyond the schema, so baseline score applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states verb ('Remove') and resource ('stale cache entry'), with a concrete example ('after file changes'). Distinguishes from sibling tools like cache_get and cache_store.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides a clear context for use (after file changes), but does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives. Still, the example gives practical guidance.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools