cache_clean

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of revealing behavior. It states a destructive action and scope but doesn't explicitly warn about irreversibility, permission requirements, or side effects. The 'Requires confirm: true' adds a small but useful safety note. More transparency about the consequence of deletion would improve this score.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence communicates purpose, constraints, and prerequisite without wasted words. Every element contributes value.

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 destructive operation with no output schema or annotations, this description covers input scope, source data, and an important requirement (confirm). It could mention that deletion is permanent, but given the simple two-parameter tool and clear sibling context, it is adequately 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?

The schema only documents 'path' with a description, leaving 'confirm' as a bare boolean. The description compensates by clarifying 'Requires confirm: true', which adds meaning about how to use the confirm parameter. While path semantics come from the schema, the additional constraint on confirm bridges the coverage gap effectively.

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?

Clearly states 'Delete a specific DerivedData or ModuleCache.noindex path', using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself by referencing 'previously reported by cache_inspect', which differentiates it from siblings like build_run or config_lint.

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 implies usage as a follow-up to cache_inspect, naming the source tool and stating a prerequisite ('Requires confirm: true'). It provides clear context for when to use this destruction tool rather than alternatives, though it doesn't explicitly say when not to use it.

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