list_cached_results

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits itself. It reveals that the tool lists cached results and specifies the returned fields, but it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or non-mutating, nor does it mention permissions, rate limits, or side effects. The verb 'List' implies safety, but this is not an explicit disclosure.

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 sentence of 13 words, beginning with the verb 'List'. It includes the resource and the output fields without any filler or redundancy, earning top marks for conciseness.

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?

The tool is simple (no parameters, no output schema). The description states the purpose and the fields returned, which is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly. It could be enhanced by clarifying what qualifies as 'large' or detailing cache behavior, but these are not essential for basic usage.

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?

This tool has zero parameters, so the description has no parameter burden to carry. According to the rubric, 0 params earns a baseline 4. The description's mention of output fields provides context about what the tool returns, which is useful but not directly about parameters.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource as 'large results currently held in the session cache'. It also enumerates the output fields (id, label, size, age), making its function clear and distinct from the sibling tool `read_cached_result`, which retrieves an individual cached result.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention `read_cached_result` or any other related tool, nor does it specify when not to use it. The intended usage is only implied by the name and verb.

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