refresh_cache

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions invalidation but lacks details on whether the operation is reversible, the scope of cache cleared (all or per provider), and what 'expired entries' means. More context is needed for a destructive operation.

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 extremely concise: two sentences covering purpose and parameter usage. No superfluous content; every sentence 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?

Given the low complexity (1 parameter) and presence of an output schema, the description is adequate but could benefit from clarifying that the effect is immediate and affects subsequent queries. Otherwise, it sufficiently covers the tool's functionality.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds value by specifying valid provider values ('aws', 'gcp', 'azure') and the behavior for an empty string (purge expired entries). This goes beyond the schema, which only defines type and default.

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 states the tool invalidates the pricing cache to force fresh data on next request. The verb 'invalidate' and resource 'pricing cache' are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like 'cache_stats' which likely shows cache status.

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 implies usage when fresh pricing data is needed but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives, such as checking cache age via 'cache_stats' first. It also lacks scenarios where this tool should not be used.

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