Rate cache status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It transparently indicates a read-only status operation scoped to the local machine, and it sets expectations about the kind of information returned (cached items, age, refresh time). It does not explicitly state that the operation has no side effects, but 'status' implies a non-mutating check.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the core output fields, and the second sentence adds an important usage caution. Every word earns its place.

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 status tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what the agent needs: what the tool reports, its local/offline context, and when to consult it. Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description sufficiently substitutes for an empty schema by describing what the tool reports, and the baseline for zero-parameter tools 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 specifies that the tool reports what is cached, how old the cache is, and when it will refresh. This differentiates it from sibling rate/value tools by focusing on cache state rather than rate data itself, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'returns' or 'shows'.

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 a clear context for use: check this before trusting a rate on a machine that has been offline. It does not discuss when not to use it or name alternative tools, but the provided guidance is actionable and specific.

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