refreshManagedPricesRe-fetch the ledger's managed price feeds now and return each source's status (the ledgerManagedPrices records). Never edits the ledger. ledger is required unless pinned.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ledger | No | Target ledger as owner/name. Required for an unpinned credential; defaults to the credential's ledger restriction. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| ok | Yes | ||
| error | No | ||
| result | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds useful clarity beyond the annotations by stating 'Never edits the ledger' and describing the return as each source's status. This helps reconcile the non-read-only annotation with the reassurance that no ledger edits occur, though external side effects are only implied by the openWorldHint annotation.
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 front-loaded and efficient: it states the action, return behavior, safety boundary, and parameter condition in three tight sentences. Nothing is wasted.
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 has only one parameter, rich annotations, and an output schema. The description covers the action, return focus, non-editing behavior, and ledger requirement, leaving no material gap for an agent to call it correctly.
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%, so the input schema already documents the ledger parameter fully. The description's 'required unless pinned' restates the schema's defaulting behavior without adding significant new parameter semantics.
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 verb and resource: it re-fetches the ledger's managed price feeds and returns each source's status. The phrase 'managed price feeds' clearly differentiates this from sibling refresh actions such as refreshBankConnection.
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 by saying 'now' and clarifying that ledger is required unless pinned, but it does not explicitly state when to use this instead of related refresh or sync tools. The agent must infer the triggering condition.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.