read_cache

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

Annotations are contradictory: readOnlyHint true suggests no side effects, but destructiveHint true implies potential destruction. The description does not resolve this; it only says 'retrieve', which aligns with readOnlyHint but contradicts destructiveHint. No additional behavioral context beyond annotations.

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?

Two compact sentences that front-load the purpose and usage context with no filler. Every word is necessary.

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?

The description covers the trigger and key usage but lacks details on the return format (no output schema). For a paginated data retrieval, describing the response structure would improve completeness.

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?

All three parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the description does not add new meaning. Baseline is appropriate.

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 the tool retrieves paginated data specifically when a response was truncated, using a provided cache key. It distinguishes itself from sibling read tools by its specialized recovery use case.

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?

Description explicitly states when to use (when truncated) and what input to use (cache key). It could be improved by mentioning when not to use (e.g., caching not involved) or referencing alternatives, but the context is clear.

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