list_settings_cache

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds 'active caches' and the GET endpoint, but does not disclose further behavioral details like auth requirements or what 'active' means. With annotations present, the description does not need to repeat safety, but it also adds limited extra context.

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 very short and front-loaded with the core purpose. The second line, 'GET /api/v1/settings/cache', is somewhat redundant with the tool name and description but is not overly verbose, so it does not significantly hurt conciseness.

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 zero-parameter, read-only list operation with rich annotations and an output schema, the description is sufficient: it states the resource being returned and the schema/annotations cover safety and response structure. There are no required parameters or complex semantics left undocumented.

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 and an empty input schema, so parameter semantics are trivially satisfied. The description correctly implies a parameterless call; the baseline for 0 parameters is 4.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('active caches'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling cache mutation tools like create_settings_cache_by_cache_id_flush. It adds the 'active' qualifier, making it more informative than a tautology of the tool name.

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 gives clear context: this is a read-only list operation for active caches. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but with zero parameters and no competing list-cache sibling, the appropriate usage is unambiguous.

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