wp_flush_cache

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the cache targets and the required plugin, but it does not mention side effects such as temporary performance impact or whether any permissions are needed. The core side effect (clearing caches) is visible in the verb, so this is adequate but not rich.

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?

Two short sentences front-load the action and add only the essential plugin prerequisite. There is no filler or repetition of schema content.

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 two-parameter tool with a fully documented schema, the description plus schema cover purpose, scope, prerequisite, and parameter behavior. It does not describe the return value or all edge cases, but those are unlikely to prevent correct invocation.

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%: both dry_run and page_id already have clear descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 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 states a specific action ("Flush") and a clear resource set ("WordPress, Elementor, and page caches"). The sibling list contains no other cache-flush tool, so this tool is easily distinguished by purpose alone.

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?

It provides a prerequisite ("Requires the optional cache helper mu-plugin"), which tells an agent when it is safe to call, but it does not describe concrete scenarios, exclusions, or alternatives. Since no cache-related sibling exists, the missing alternative guidance is less harmful, but the when-to-use context is still largely implied.

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