查看缓存状态

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the read-only nature ('查看' = view) and purpose, which is transparent, but it does not detail the return format, potential size, or any side effects beyond the implied read-only behavior. This is adequate but not rich.

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: '查看当前缓存的键和数量，用于调试和监控'. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, with every word contributing to the meaning, and no redundant wording.

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's low complexity (no params, no output schema), the description sufficiently explains what it does and why. It could specify the output structure (e.g., keys list vs. count object) but the current scope is acceptable for a simple status tool.

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 accepts zero parameters, so the schema already fully covers parameter semantics. The description adds no parameter details because none exist, which is appropriate. Baseline for 0 params 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 clearly states the tool's function: '查看当前缓存的键和数量' (view current cache keys and count). This is a specific verb+resource, and it differentiates from siblings like cache_clear by focusing on status observation rather than mutation.

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 says '用于调试和监控' (for debugging and monitoring), providing clear context on when to use it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context implies this is for read-only inspection, distinct from cache_clear.

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