cache_stats

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

The description discloses that the tool provides a snapshot and is process-local with zero initial state, but does not explicitly state whether it is read-only, expensive, or has side effects. With no annotations, the description could be more explicit about safety and performance impact.

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 concise (two lines), front-loads the version, and immediately conveys the tool's purpose. Every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description adequately describes the return values (hits, misses, size, hitRate) and scope (per-tier, process-local). It could be slightly improved by noting performance implications or whether it locks caches.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter information, but this is acceptable because no parameters exist. Baseline score of 4 is appropriate.

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 provides a per-tier snapshot of global search caches with specific metrics (hits, misses, size, hitRate) and distinguishes it from other cache-related tools. The verb 'showing' and resource 'global search caches' are precise.

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 the tool is for inspecting cache stats, but it offers no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like cache_clear or reindex. There is no mention of when not to use it or prerequisites.

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