cache_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Get' implying a read-only operation, but does not explicitly confirm idempotency, side-effect freedom, or rate limits. For a simple read tool, this is a minor gap.

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 a single concise sentence that captures the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient, earning its place with no redundancy.

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 simplicity of the tool (no parameters, no output schema) and the presence of many sibling tools, the description is minimally adequate. It states the purpose but omits details like the nature of the configuration (e.g., plain text, JSON structure) and does not confirm that it is safe to call. A more complete description would include a note on read-only behavior or typical response contents.

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 parameter semantics are inherently clear. The schema coverage is 100% by default, and the description adds no extra parameter info because none is needed. This meets the baseline expectation for parameterless tools.

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 'Get cache configuration and settings' clearly specifies the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'cache_stats' (which returns statistics) and 'clear_cache' (which mutates state). However, it could be more precise about what specific configuration aspects are returned.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The purpose is implied, but there is no mention of prerequisites, when-not to use it, or comparisons to sibling tools like 'cache_stats' or 'list_cache_keys'. A brief note on context would improve clarity.

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