cache

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, consistent with cache management. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond annotations, such as what data is affected, auth requirements, or side effects.

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 (two sentences) but overly terse. It sacrifices completeness for brevity, and the reference to external docs reduces self-contained value. Not front-loaded with critical info.

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 has multiple operations, a nested config object, and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain what each operation does, how parameters behave, or what results are returned.

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?

Schema description coverage is only 33% (only 'key' has a description). The description provides no parameter details, failing to compensate for the low coverage. The enum for 'operation' is documented only in the schema.

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 says 'Manage the cache' which is a tautology of the tool name and lacks specificity. It does not list the available operations or differentiate from sibling tools, though no sibling directly manages cache. The reference to 'rtfm' suggests external documentation is needed.

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 guidance on when to use this tool. The description instructs to 'See rtfm for details' but provides no context on appropriate usage vs alternatives. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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