get_cache_stats

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations by specifying that the tool reports on media cache (images/videos), storage usage, and file counts. It does not contradict annotations, and it gives a clear picture of what the tool returns.

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 concise, consisting of three short sentences with no redundant information. It front-loads the purpose with 'REQUIRED for checking media cache status and storage usage' and then gives actionable guidance on when to use it. 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 the tool is simple (0 params, no output schema), the description covers the essential usage scenarios and what the tool reports. It is complete enough for an agent to decide when to invoke it. It could mention potential limitations or whether stats are global, but these are not critical for basic usage.

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, so the schema Description coverage is fully satisfied. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics, but with no parameters required, no additional explanation is necessary. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description does not introduce confusion about inputs.

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 a specific verb+resource: 'checking media cache status and storage usage' and elaborates on what is measured ('how many files have been analyzed and cached'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_cached_media and cleanup_media_cache, which focus on searching or deleting cached media.

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 provides explicit usage scenarios: 'Use this tool when users ask about cache statistics, storage space used by cached media, or how many files have been analyzed and cached.' It is marked as 'REQUIRED' for these cases. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools such as search_cached_media or cleanup_media_cache for other cache-related tasks.

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