spring_cache_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the tool can mutate state and specifies what is destroyed ('entrées expirées' or 'tout le cache'), which is genuine behavioral value, but it omits reversibility, permission requirements, and any warning that 'all' is irreversible.

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-formed sentence that front-loads the read behavior and appends the optional mutation. Nothing is padded, though splitting the destructive capability into its own sentence would improve scannability.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema and full schema coverage, the description supplies enough to call it correctly, including the read/write duality. The main omission is any note on the shape or size of the returned statistics and the destructive nature of 'all'.

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 100% and the single enum parameter is fully documented in the schema, including that 'none' is read-only and purge runs before display. The description mirrors this at a high level but adds no syntax or default details beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb+resource pair ('Affiche les statistiques du cache du serveur') plus a secondary action (purge), and lists the concrete data exposed (entrées, expirées, capacité). It is clearly a different resource from every sibling (all docs/search/version tools), though it never explicitly contrasts itself with an alternative.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: an agent can infer it should call this to inspect cache health or to clean the cache. There is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not-to-use guidance and no prerequisites (e.g. whether purging requires the server to be running or a specific role).

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