vision_clear_cache

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and contributes a regeneration hint by calling the resource a 'cache' (implying it can be rebuilt). It also scopes the effect to 'on-disk', but it never says whether active sessions are affected, whether the lease/session params matter, or what the actual side effects are.

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?

One short imperative sentence with no wasted words. The core verb and object are front-loaded, and 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 simple mutation tool with an optional session and a lease mechanism, the description covers the core purpose but leaves the invocation context unnamed: it does not say when to clear the cache, how it interacts with session/lease params, or what the operational impact is. Adequate but gappy.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3 even though the description mentions no parameters. The description adds nothing about the optional 'lease' or 'session' parameters, but the schema already documents them fully.

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 'Drop the on-disk vision coords cache' uses a specific verb ('Drop') and a precise resource ('on-disk vision coords cache'). It differentiates this tool from the many vision-related siblings (vision_click, vision_find, vision_stats, vision_budget) because none of them concern clearing a cache.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, why the cache might need clearing, or when to use it versus any alternative. The description is a bare imperative with no situational context, so an agent must infer when to call it.

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